[And I don’t consider the normal operation of the consumption tax as “gaming” anything - unlike many situations under the income tax.]
The entire FairTax is “gaming” the system of fair and equitable taxation to fund necessary government spending. In my example, the family earning $100K ends up paying barely half as much in taxes as the $15K they currently would pay on SS/M alone. Yet they still get full credit and future benefits equal to what would require a $15K contribution today. Which means their actual tax contribution for necessary government spending — like national defense, judiciary, etc. to protect their lives, liberties, and pursuit of happiness — is ZERO. People should not get something for nothing.
If I had to list the single most dangerous idea to the continued prosperity of America, it is the notion that it is OK to pay nothing for necessary government. There are millions of people out there that think they “don’t make enough money to have to pay taxes”. Yet government costs money, and if it doesn’t come from that person, it must come from their neighbor. People are either willfully ignorant of this fact, or knowingly approve of the government robbing their neighbor rather than shouldering their own tax burden. These people have conspired to steal from their neighbors and should be despised just like any other armed robber.
One of the think I like about the FairTax is that is DOES have everyone contributing to the tax revenue. The fact that some of those have their tax rate reduced or (in some few cases) eliminated does not disturb me as much as it seems to affront you since even those reduced rate folks - you can be sure - will see that they are “paying tax” when they buy consumption items as specified in the bill and they’ll wish to have even that rate lowered (rather than look at it a chance to get more by raising the rate as you proffer.
The fact that even those living on the margin will certainly view themselves (rightfully) as “paying taxes”
rather than living “high on the hog” via government dole is a point that I think will be effective is helping hold down the tax rate more than you believe (obviously) for the reasons you cite. It will be the first time perhaps in a lifetime that some of these taxpayers will have any real opportunity to boost themselves up a rung or two on the economic ladder by their own thriftiness.
For these and other reasons I don’t see it as “gaming the system: at all since there is nothing the taxpayer can do to “game” anything - that’s the way the law was intended to operate. Unlike the income tax system where there are myriad opportunities to “game the system” should you take it at your peril to do so (since it’s not intended to allow that and there are serious penalties to prevent such), the FairTax is not gamed at all by the taxpayer following the FairTax law. He should be able to benefit much more from this tax law than the present one while breaking no laws at all (nor spending sizable sums of money or time to do so).
Like you, I very much think that all should pay something - even those here illegally (or generating illegally) - and that alone will add millions of people to the tax rolls. I think having foreign visitors paying the FairTax is also a good idea since they, after all, take advantage of a number of taxpayer-funded events and activities ... and they are not eligible for the prebate wither.
Unlike you, though, I don’t believe that equating SS/MC payments to what is paid in tax is a reasonable thing. After all we both agree that those two entitlements are broken and I - at least - would like to see both eliminated. Things don’t always go in the same direction forever and, I believe, so it is with SS/MC - those will eventually be reduced (if not eliminated) so throwing them into a tax payment as some sort of tax equivalence is not a good idea since when going the other direction the opposite effect takes hold. I think it’s better to separate the view of the tax from its squandering (via entitlements) which is, after all, a political action that can be relatively easily reversed - or as least “easily” as compared to reversing a complete tax system we’ve had for darned near a century.
I suppose it's all relative and we'll doubtless disagree on that first paragraph as I've discussed. I'm merely pointing out my beliefs rather than trying to change yours so there's nothing wrong with differing views.
I still believe the FairTax offers the best hope for correcting some of the tax/spending ills we've gotten ourselves into with the present system where many (even on these threads) know they are not part of the tax system - or at least proportionally less than they might be. I think much of the spitting and fuming on these threads is one indicator of that.