Posted on 09/22/2007 7:18:53 PM PDT by netvictory
I think I'd support the FairTax, but I'd also accept a Constitutionally fixed Flat Tax a la Steve Forbes, provided we could guarantee that no ball-hidden-under-the-jersey loophole for increasing it or adding other taxes to it lurked behind it.
Don't let the best be the enemy of the good, guys and dolls.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Eternity Road
When the FairTax is enacted is the day the Stanley Cup finals will be held in Hell.
********************************************
Didn’t Tampa Bay win a few years back?? Thats a pretty far cry from Alberta..
My contention also.
We've seen how the home sales market affects the economy in general. The Fair Tax will kill it.
New construction and the auto industry will die.
Anyone who thinks mfgrs. will pass on their savings in 'hidden' taxes to the consumer are smoking some good stuff.
I give you, as an example the 'sugar crisis' circa mid 70's.
Sugar prices went sky high.
Soft drink companies raised the price of a soft drink exponentially, including artificially sweetened drinks.
When sugar prices returned to normal, guess what, soft drinks stayed at their high levels.
I contend the same logic will be used again by companies.
by Rush’s own statements the OVERWHELMING INCREASE in government intrusion and INCREASING in taxable goods and services will be ANTI-conservative.
The prebate ALONE is a communist agenda item. A prebate to each according to their needs, a prebate taken from each according to their abilities.
It is PURE insanity. OVERNIGHT every single renter will have their taxes SHOOT UP to cover the fair tax. Most ALL residential and commercial leases have passthrough clauses for taxes.
Why would Rush support ANYTHING that taxes Rush 24/7 subscriptions when the tax is zero now.
I have actually read the materials.
In fact it is mostly supporters who have convinced me to go from “whatever” to very against the Fair Sales Tax scam.
It is the constant lies and deciet of supporters of this scam, their refusal to acknowledge the SERIOUS flaws in their system.
Given their delusional support, I would submit there IS credence to the fact fair tax supporters are connected to scientologists given their mental behavior.
if double taxation is a problem now, consider when EVERY SINGLE raw material purchase is taxed along the production line.
The oil is taxed when made into plastic is taxed to make the switch is taxed when sold to the car maker is taxed when the car is sold to the consumer. QUADRUPPLE.
If the shift from the Income Tax to the FairTax were immediate, there would be huge dislocations in our economy."Based on what facts do you make this statement? This vague statement lacks any credibility without any detailed facts to backup your claim. Based on what facts do you make this statement?"
Are Sunday mornings difficult for you, sir? The American economy is a wealthy economy, a very large percentage of which is made up of "luxury" industries kept in business by wholly discretionary spending. Such industries possess elastic demand curves; changes in price produce swift, proportional changes in demand. If we were to transfer the tax burden immediately from incomes to sales, the "luxury" industries would suffer an immediate, sharp increase in the effective prices of their wares. The "necessity" industries -- food, clothing, shelter, fuel, and the like -- are highly inelastic; their demand curves would not be nearly as greatly disturbed. A little economics is all it takes to proceed from there.
If the shift were gradual, those who favor the Income Tax (and Big, anti-Constitutional government) would be able to find a way to keep them both."Three reason why that won't happen: (1) it abolishes the IRS, (2) The Fair Tax repeals all statutory language having to do with taxing income and payroll (i.e., the Internal Revenue Code), and (3) it eliminates the filing of annual income tax returns to the federal government for over 140 million Americans. Fair Tax FAQ #50. Also House Joint Resolution 16(HJR16) will repeal the 16th Amendment."
My word, some people really should learn to read before they attempt to write. The very first words of my statement were "If the shift were gradual." That presumes that your Utopian scenario, in which the income tax and the IRS are iummediately abolished, does not arise. If the income tax and a federal sales tax were allowed to coexist for a few years, you can bet your bottom dollar -- probably all the rest of them, too -- that powerful forces would marshal in an attempt to keep them both. No government in history has ever surrendered any aspect of its power of taxation without being displaced by a revolution, which makes this a particularly ominous possibility.
There would, of necessity, be a new bureaucracy at the federal level, whose mission is FairTax collection and enforcement. That bureaucracy would likely have the same powers as the IRS -- but over businesses this time."This is flat out wrong. The already existing Treasury Department will be the taxing authority and will not have the same powers as the IRS. You forget the IRS goes after individuals because their income is taxed. Abolishing the income tax will end that practice since people will be paying a consumption tax at the point of sale. The government will only be assessing businesses, not individuals."
Yet another demonstration of willful incomprehension. The existing Treasury Department is far too small to provide the tax police required by a law that mandates tax collection from America's four million businesses. Businesses are likely to mandate more scrutiny and enforcement than individual income taxation ever did, because their largely unmonitored cash flow is traditionally the vehicle by which the well-to-do have evaded taxation. Even in your optimum scenario in which the IRS vanishes and all income tax collection ends at once, that will require a massive new agency of assessment and collection -- and it might well have the same anti-Constitutional coercive power as the IRS. This is what thinkers call a consequence. Look into the concept; you might find it useful.
We would have to find something to do with a quarter million tax lawyers and a half million tax accountants -- and weighing then down with concrete blocks and dumping them into the ocean would upset the hell out of the greenies."We would have to? People who are laid off are required to find their own jobs. I've been laid off and always had to take the initiative to find another job. There maybe assistance to help them find jobs but there is no requirement. Regardless of that fact, you're talking about well educated, highly trained individuals seeking employment in an expanding economy due to the implementation of The Fair Tax."
We're talking about well educated, highly trained individuals who share two other characteristics as well:
That makes it likely that any law that greatly alters the tax system will be written to incorporate some sort of subvention for them. It's not absolutely certain, but it's something to watch out for.
Be an enthusiast for the FairTax if you like -- as I wrote above, I support it myself -- but be a realist about political dynamics and the likelihood of unintended consequences. Oh, there's that word again. Anyway, I'd like to recommend that you acquire a book, a very special book: Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language. I find it invaluable. It's not profusely illustrated, but you'll probably get some use out of it even so.
Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Eternity Road
In some ways I like the fair tax because it seems to be functionally equivalent to the VAT, but I will never, never, never support it unless the amendment to the constitution for income taxes is repealed, first.
The last thing in the world that I want to see is two tax systems. Yes I know the fair taxers want to do away with the income tax, but this is just a bill, like any others before congress. It can be modified and changed 10 minutes after it has been passed.
Just like the same people who believe corporations pay taxes?
ALL taxes, (most hidden within the price of an item) will be replaced with the fair tax.
ALL withholding from paychecks will cease! SO, even IF your prediction of mfgrs. not passing their savings along to the consumer is true, consumers will have 30% more in their paycheck anyway.
(BTW, if you believe mfgrs. WON'T pass the savings, YOU are smoking something stronger than RJR or Philip-Morris markets. Every mfgr. wants as much market share as they can get, and as soon as one HINTS of a price cut, the rest will match or beat it. GUARANTEED!
But it's not guaranteed.
There are arguments for it happening and there are arguments against it happening.
It can only be guaranteed if it is required in the legislation that is actually passed.
First, there weren't any vending machines that could decide between a diet or a regular Coke, and price them differently.
Second, perhaps the TOTAL increase would have been higher if just the sugared drinks were raised, instead of spreading the increase along all product lines.
Third, artificial sweeteners were under fire for being suspected carcinogens. (I know, my dad was a diabetic, and Saccharin was all their was.)
This would give the people some idea just how MUCH taxes they are really paying.
THEN, the next time some elected official tries to raise taxes, he may not live long enough to get off the podium....
Lately, whenever one announces a rate hike, most either ignore the hike or increase a little, forcing the initial "hiker" to ignore or repeal the original hike.
It is a prediction of human and business behavior, is it not, regardless of how certain you and others think it will be?
When government gets involved, all the companies have to do is meet the standard set by government. Even if a company can market a product/service for less than the standard, they can't sell it for less.
As in all things, if the government is involved in it, we ALL get screwed....
Nah. My kids are. ;-)
Oh, and me and Mr. Eyespy, both under 40.
But yes, you are right about the number of seasoned citizens who believe in the FairTax. My in-laws (both 60+) want it to pass for our benefit, and their grandkids benefit.
The tax removal from airline ticket prices in the mid-1990’s is a perfect example of what would happen (because it DID happen). Prices immediately dropped because of competition. Your example is speculation as far as I know.
Also, you missed my previous point: I said if the law requires it, it would be theft. If the law doesn’t require it competition takes over (per the example I reference above).
If you don’t support the Fair Tax, what tax reform do you support?
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.