Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: crz
It's simple. You trust your government more than they (we?) do.

Repeal the 16th amendment first. Then we can talk about the "fair tax" system.

Given how they've scammed the enforcement of borders and immigration laws, I think we can safely assume they'd find a way to do both the income and sales tax on the federal level.

208 posted on 12/24/2007 10:38:07 AM PST by newzjunkey (Huckabee, Rudy, Romney: 3 red herrings, 3 easy pickings for Dems in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]


To: newzjunkey
Repeal the 16th amendment first. Then we can talk about the "fair tax" system.

I don't know of a single Fairtax supporter who does not also support the repeal of the 16th amendment but, as a practical matter, HOW would you propose getting that done without first having in place a working replacement tax system?

211 posted on 12/24/2007 10:42:12 AM PST by Bigun (IRS sucks @getridof it.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies ]

To: newzjunkey

And now comes the arguement..are taxes on income constitutional?

This past year, a lawyer (I believe it was in Ten) won a CIVIL court case brought against him by the tresury dept, on his failure to pay income taxes. He owed about 60 grand in back taxes. All he did was challenge the plaintiffs asking them to show where the law is that states he HAS to pay income taxes. They couldnt, and when asked about it, the treasury dept declined to comment.

BTW. the lawyer said in court that if they could show him the “LAW” he would gladly pay his back taxes as well as all interest and penalties.

There are quite a few cases like this that were won. But you and I could not afford to fight the government and that is the weight they hold over our heads...And so, Freedom from Fear is dead.


230 posted on 12/24/2007 11:15:28 AM PST by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies ]

To: newzjunkey

Repealing the 16th first is not only not necessary - it’s not even a political possibility since if you’ll stop to think about it you’d be asking politicians to eliminate their method of raising government revenue before having any other practical method in place.

Surely you don’t realistically expect any pol - no matter his party or political leaning - to so opvertly ask to be ushered out of office by his voting for financial chaos.

And I note that all of the FairTax anti (groups and individuals) side of things ALWAYS use the idea of a 23% (or 30%) additional tax on EVERYTHING. That’s pure demagoguery (to use the polite term) since the FairTax is not applied to everything nor is the rate 30% or even 23%. That’s the marginal rate just as your income tax bracket may be 28, 33, or 35% but your effective income tax rate is much much lower. These “anti” propagandists actually know that but prefer to mislead by pretending the marginal Fairtax rate (23%) rate is the effective rate. By using one of the FairTax rate calculators (or reading the bill) you could see that there are many things untaxed and the effective tax rate is typically much lower for you than it is at present.

I’ve done this and my effective rate is almost half of what it is under the income tax. That will probably be true for most of you unless you fall for the misinformation the anti crowd spews constantly. They have reasons for preferring tax systems as at present, obviously. Make your own comparison - and do it honestly since there are many things you are not taxed on under the FairTax.

In addition, keep in mind that the 20 million or so illegal aliens, drug dealers, etc. will now be paying taxes on their consumption - when at present they pay almost (or completely) nothing.


231 posted on 12/24/2007 11:24:14 AM PST by baybabe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson