The FairTax is revenue neurtral so that it cannot be said to change the amount of tax revenue raised by the tax system so that we are not forced into unwise economic moves but have a chance to improve things economically over the next few years.
In fact because the FairTax will greatly boost the country's economy, we stand a better chance of having the wherewithal to "pay off" such a debt (if that's even a valid number) than under the present tax system which is dragging this country downward and greatly contributing to many of our economic ills.
The unfunded liabilities are a part of the discussion because #1) FT will replace the SS payroll tax but does nothing to address the liability of the system...other than to say that it is “revenue nuetral” which means nothing when this proposal addresses only half the problem with the SS (quite conveniently I may add) and #2) check it out or FT people like to say “if you would study the problem a little more closely” then you would know and #3) despite the SSA low level of benefits, (my Mom & Dad paid into the system for 50 years, which when amortized at a modest interest rate would have yielded them 4-5 million in savings, my Mom gets $1100 per month in this grand “social security”) the benefits to me will have be reduced out of necessity for survival of the system, and my daughter gets to contribute her share for 50 years and FOR WHAT? NOTHING! And FT is so SHALLOW it ignores this problem and says its “revenue nuetral”? and that it doesn’t have anything to do with it? That’s politics for you! ...and #4) even if I’m off by 20% the unfunded liabilities would still be some 22 trillion OR see for yourself at www.socialsecurity.org/catoplan/. I can’t believe that this is not an issue to any true tax reformer!!
Oh...I almost forgot...WHY would I want to PAY for prebate distributions if I didn’t have to? (Ignore that question if you want to)