Posted on 09/12/2007 2:53:37 PM PDT by Man50D
Lusysmom is dead on the mark with the idea of "the devil you know".
If you go back and read some of the really old NRST/FT threads, they've been getting their butts kicked for nearly 10 years, and the conversation today isn't even 1% more civil on their behalf than it was then. This, sadly, speaks volumes.
Thank God for the fact that at the rate their going, it'll take another 50 years to get any action on the resolutions, and it just might die a quiet death before then.
That's what makes the "love us and the fair tax or you love the IRS" crap so funny. Many favor tax reform, just not their version of it.
The fair tax has too many flaws that have been exposed over and over. Be it the rate, the "prebate" the "hope" that Congress kills the sixteenth, that lovely theory that product costs go down because "accounting over head" is reduced, what have you, there are too many ifs and loop holes.
It is still a progressive tax, it just changes the collection points and accounting methods, and not in a good way for small to medium business.
I'll keep the devil I know for now, not out of love for it, but out of fear of wild schemes and their long term effects. I don't want to live like a cheap bastard to save on my taxes. Then what is the point...
Man, I did not realize this crap had been going on this long. I guess when they bought it a new dress (from NRST to Fair Tax) The game went into over time.
Well I submit your opinion will be worth what it is right now: ZERO, since you both choose not to answer a simple question. This is a DEBATE forum, Hello!?
I think you can find the word in the dictionary. Your presence has emboldened X. He had declared this thread "dead" because he was beginning to resemble chopped meat. Please x, keep blaming us for the tone of the discussion. As anyone can read that is certainly not the case. THe wild eyed shrilless comes from your side. I see X has found his courage once again now that ej has emerged to hold his hand.
Do you know how to debate?
It used to be a civil business on these threads. Now, of course, it is nothing more than you SQLs accusing us of trickery and chicanery, IOW you can't win on the merits (or even compete) so you resort to attacking your opponent in any way you can.
That makes us all look bad. You should be ashamed.
I wouldn't even bother wasting my time on these threads other than like a ponzi scheme, they need "N00BS" and economically ignorant suckers to perpetuate the lie...
My only goal is to continue working on rational tax reform (with some real successes) and informing people just what a jackass scheme the not-so-fair-tax is.
What an amazing coincidence. LOL.
You posited this question:
Why don’t you tell us why you prefer the income tax to the FairTax.
Which you derived from this post:
Giving them a touch of hell I see... Fair Tax, the official tax system of Fantasy Land... See they are doing the old either or. Either you are for their Fair Tax or you “love” the IRS. Horse Hockey. Overly simplified answer from an overly simplified group pushing a flawed plan.
No where in there did I state that I prefer the Income Tax. I did imply that I don't like the Fair tax. That is what is so funny about fanatics. Their either / or approach is so endearing. Just because I don't like your proposal does not mean I want what we have now. It is simply that your plan does not improve the current situation.
As to an answer, I know where I stand with the income tax. Indeed it is the devil I know. Do I like it, as I am sure you will infer to meet you need to feel like you have won something, no, I don't like it. Does that mean I am ready to jump on the Fair Tax band wagon, not by a long shot.
Currently there is at least a level of fairness in the tax system. Basically everyone pays, and despite the progressive nature, it can be dealt with.
Your plan changes none of the progression. Now if I want to live like a pauper I can avoid paying tax, but I may not choose to live that way. So now I pay more that the cheap SOB down the street. Why should I be punished because I choose to live well in the most prosperous nation in the world. That is punishing success and the trappings there of.
There are other flaws, but as far as selling the plan that will be the deal breaker right there. When people understands they will be 30%+ between state and federal sales tax on items at Best Buy or where ever, this thing will be dead. People don't like dealing with taxes as it is, being reminded everytine they go shopping, yeah, that'll work.
That's why I think there is such a rabid defense of Fair Tax by some (not all) I think many have found away to avoid paying taxes. "Live cheap and buy used, you won't have to pay much" is the response I get when I complain about the added costs. I see why it would be popular with some. But most Americans like new TVs and their kids want new clothes and such. It will matter little that they no longer pay an income tax when every purchase cuts again and again.
One other thing, that pitch on live cheap, what do you think that will do to the economy if that becomes a method. Who will buy the new items?
There are many other problems, but I assume you are aware of them since you like debate so much. As far as my opinion and it's value, time will tells, but in the end there will be over 300 million citizens who will deliver their verdict via congress. That is the opinion that will count and I think you will be gravely disappointed.
The Fair Tax folks have done an outstanding marketing job, it looks real good from the outside. Hell they have a hot market, everyone hates the IRS. But is is like those cute roadside stores with the bright lights and fancy signs, once you go through the door and really take a good look around, you realize they are carrying crap. Of course those who just popped in and looked around will go out and tell their freinds how great the place is, until one day...
Once any normal person sees the dirty details, like the lawn boy just became a tax collector or that $300 Ipod did not drop in price because Apple decided they could not calculate the “overhead” savings, so now it is 390.00 with tax (or more), this thing is dead
The Fair Tax folks have done an outstanding marketing job, it looks real good from the outside. Hell they have a hot market, everyone hates the IRS. But is is like those cute roadside stores with the bright lights and fancy signs, once you go through the door and really take a good look around, you realize they are carrying crap. Of course those who just popped in and looked around will go out and tell their freinds how great the place is, until one day...
Once any normal person sees the dirty details, like the lawn boy just became a tax collector or that $300 Ipod did not drop in price because Apple decided they could not calculate the “overhead” savings, so now it is 390.00 with tax (or more), this thing is dead
Because it eliminates a huge tax the production end, and moves to the sales end. This tax is applied equally to the domestic good and the imported good.
Example: It costs a dollar to make and ship a widget in the U.S. today. Assume for the sake of argument the labor tax (income tax, employee and employer Social Security tax, and employee and employer Medicare tax) adds 25% to the cost. The sales price is $1.25.
It costs 80 cents to make and ship a widget from overseas today. A big part of the cost is in transporting the widget from China or wherever. Let's assume the 80 cents includes the income taxes in the foreign country. The sales price is $0.80.
This price differential applies in foreign markets as well if we ship our widget to a foreign country.
Now assume a 25% retail sales tax in lieu of an income tax. The U.S. good remains at $1.25. But the price of the imported good is now $1. The price difference is reduced by half. Overseas, the U.S. good costs $1, not $1.25, again reducing the price differential.
Some customers will pay a premium for a higher quality product, if the premium is reasonable.
Plus, reducing the cost of labor would likely move more high-skilled manufacturing to the U.S., especially from high priced manufacturing labor markets like Singapore, Japan, and Western Europe.
Because it eliminates a huge tax the production end,Describe the huge tax on production...how does it work?
Plus, reducing the cost of labor would likely move more high-skilled manufacturing to the U.S.,How does 100% paychecks reduce the cost of labor?
Magic...
Assume for the sake of argument the labor tax (income tax, employee and employer Social Security tax, and employee and employer Medicare tax) adds 25% to the cost. The sales price is $1.25.$1.25 after taxes.
Now assume a 25% retail sales tax in lieu of an income tax. The U.S. good remains at $1.25.$1.25 from wages reduced 20%.
Same price from reduced wages...No advantage for the taxpayer/consumer there.
Maybe they figured out a way for the rest of the world to pay us for the goods they produce....
If you think the FairTax is "fantasy land" then you must prefer to take what we have than to switch to the FairTax. I don't think you can deny such a conclusion is justified. All of us would like to know the attributes of the income tax that make it preferable to a NRST. You have actually given us some reasons which I would like to refute tonight after my Saturday chores.
BTW, your polite and reasoned response is alien to X who has never been real polite and who takes cheap potshots instead of engaging in debate.
Take home wages are not reduced.
Some speak of keeping 100% of your pay. If we assume that, everyone will have more money, but production costs will be the same. But the extra take home pay will offset the sales tax in a revenue neutral scenario.
Others speak of reducing costs of production, but this also means reducing topline wages, so things will cost less, but there will be no increase in take home pay.
I know of no Fair Tax scenario where someone will take home less pay. Also, given the Fair Tax's plan for the Fair Tax to replace Social Security and Medicare Taxes, it does mean a 7.65% reduction in labor costs even if the employee keeps 100% of their paycheck.
The numbers really do not matter. In a revenue neutral situation, it will be a wash. What matters is the collection point. And moving the collection point to after production does change the economics of domestic goods versus imported goods. Likewise, it does change the current economics of illegal labor versus legal labor.
What continues to surprise me are people who politically are opposed to manufacturing moving overseas, and are politically opposed to illegal labor, but also support the current income tax over a national retail sales tax.
A flat tax could help, but as a tax imposed prior to production instead of after production, it has the same problem the current income tax with respect to domestic goods versus imported goods, and does nothing to the economics of illegal labor.
My guess is what will finally move the Fair Tax up in mindshare is when the anti-illegal immigration movement realizes the Fair Tax is a critical step to addressing the illegal immigration problem by changing the economics of illegal labor.
The other thing which will help the Fair Tax is when union members realize the Fair Tax would help the manufacturing economy and press their unions to support it.
Take home wages are not reduced.How else would labor costs be reduced?
Take home wages are after taxes. You're suggesting paying (sales) taxes (the same prices as before) from what used to be after tax income...IOW, your plan is to pay taxes from reduced wages.
Where's the taxpayer advantage?...Use some logic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.