Posted on 01/20/2008 6:29:07 AM PST by Man50D
During an election season, one of the first losers is the truth. The current misinformation campaign against the FairTax has been particularly virulent. Last month the FairTax was being panned by some columnists as a "crackpot scheme," even though it could be collected exactly the same way as its close cousin, the value-added tax, which is the most successful tax in the world. This month the FairTax is being vilified by various columnists as a tax increase for the middle class, even though it would provide a substantial tax cut for two-parent middle class families. Specifically, in a recent column, George Will asked, "Do you want a president (Mike Huckabee, proponent of a national sales tax of at least 30 percent) pledged to radically increase the proportion of federal taxes paid by the middle class?" Similarly, Time magazine's business and economics columnist Justin Fox wrote a blog piece entitled, "The FairTax and its big break for the $200,000-plus crowd."
The FairTax is a national sales tax that would replace the income taxes, the payroll taxes, and the gift and inheritance taxes. It would be a 30 percent sales tax on retail purchases. Since 30 cents is 23 percent of $1.30 (the amount you would pay on a $1 item), a 30 percent FairTax would cost you about 23 percent of your consumption. To help you pay the tax, you would get a prebate check or a debit card credit at the beginning of each month equivalent to the amount you would pay when buying necessities. In 2007, that amount would have been based upon $10,210 spending per adult and $3,480 spending per child.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Your suggestion would cause so many headaches for retailers it’s incredible. Do you know the type of paperwork one needs to fill out to purchase something tax free? It literally takes an extra 5-10 minutes of an employee’s time to fill out these forms. Your solution would add to the retailers cost and drive inflation even further (they would probably have to hire extra cashiers just to deal with the paperwork for those who would opt out...).
If you then say that they could computerize the systems — do you have any idea how much money it would then cost the retailers to implement these changes?
I’m not afraid of progress, or change if it’s a GOOD idea... But, this I’m afraid is definitely NOT a good idea.
At the risk of thread hijacking, I'm going to call your statement that of a simpleton since you didn't propose any replacement or solution.
Until you can offer an alternate system, your statement is without value.
But that is what those who hate the IRS and income tax are guilty of until they propose a viable alternative, such as the Fair Tax.
Hear, hear...
I was being facetious, but having read that part of the bill in recent days, I love it when the “read the book” FTers start in on getting the gov’t out of their affairs is a prime FT benefit.
Yes you can. easily.
A family with a “duplex” declared house suddenly gets 10000 per year vs 5000. (just example numbers the real numbers will be higher based on history and gradual inflation)
The neat part is that it will all be legal, all out in the open, and local municipalities will have every incentive to allow such “residence splitting” because it means money for them.
oops then my bad.
So simple that a Caveman can do it; so simple that a third of freepers still can’t understand it.
Imagine that, freepers defending the status quo!
And you somehow think this system will reduce the amount of workers needed to implement it? Hardly... Unless you think that passing the job on to the retailers is something that wouldn’t affect us as well — we’ll either pay these workers through the gov’t, or we’ll pay for the extra workers in the retail industry by a rise in the price we pay for everything — on top of the new tax.
Can you explain why anyone should report their income to the government?
Agreed! There would be no need for a “Fair” tax if the government stayed within its Constitutional Bounds. And, as you pointed out — income taxes would be WAY lower...
I noticed in the last part of what you quote it mentioned birthdates... Is there a determination of a qualified child who is NOT attending school after the age of 18. If your children choose to live with you, but not attend school after that point are they still eligible to be counted?
What about people living on their own with roommates and such?
I can just imagine the administrative headaches with this system. I can’t imagine it would reduce the government workforce at all, and it would ALSO add to retailers costs as well...
For those who are proponents of this “Fair” tax... Have any major corporations “signed on” in support of this???
Note that the gov't doesn't get any IT for work you do for yourself. Cut your lawn? Tax Free! Under the FT, stuff you make for yourself won't be taxed.
that is why the first argument given in support of this absuridity is the notion of revenue neutrality. It is premised that we are taxed at the right amount but by the wrong method.
The current method and this proposal are irrelevant. We need to be taxed LESS, that is the REAL reform.
Not if there are enough boneheaded citizens like you, who will sit on their butts and bitch; refusing to find out what a better plan is all about, or trying to come up with a better plan -- and, who time after time vote back in the self-serving clods who don't, and never have, given a tinker's dam about the people they are supposed to be serving. Blame it on people like yourself -- not people who are trying to do something.
And, in the meantime, at least find out enough about the Fair Tax to quit lying about it.
I agree with you on that! That is the only thing that would truly be FAIR to ALL citizens...
We’ve already got a “Better Plan”... It’s called cutting government spending on all levels and getting rid of the welfare state.
The government also decides what is or is not a “family.” (can you say sex lifestyle lobby?)
The ammo against this scam is the scam itself.
Incorrect.
The prebate is based on the number of people in the house, not the number of houses. If you have a two adult house, the prebate for the adults is doubled. There will be no advantage to splitting the house into two houses each of which is headed by one parent. See:
http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/FairTaxPrebateExplained2007.pdf
I don't think we are defending the status quo. Some of us just don't want to be detoured/deadended on the way to smaller gov't (a windmill tilt if there ever was one). We also don't want to get screwed when the tax system gets rewritten by the Congress Critters in one of those "we didn't have time to read the whole bill" marathons.
Is there no quid pro quo in paying a property tax? Does not the taxing agency provide services and infrastructure for which you pay? How is that slavery? Don't like the rates? Move!
You are free to do so.
Don't want to pay income tax? Don't make money! Grow your own food, go off grid or mobile, or move to a different country. You are still not a slave!
You might be a homeless bum, but you will not have to pay. You decide. There is no secret tax going to jump up and eat you. The rates are pretty well known. You choose to pay when you earn money, or you can choose not to earn money. THe government will not stand behind you with a gun to your head demanding you do such and such and earn X number of dollars so they can tax you. You do it because you want the convenience of a paycheck, a roof over your head, and address, a vehicle to drive and the streets to drive it on. Freedom comes with a cost. All else incurs obligation, but no one held a gun to your head to make you earn the paycheck you are taxed on, you did it of your own volition. Hence, you are not a slave. You are even free to gripe abou the commission the government charges,or the protection racket they have going. What slave would badmouth massa that way?
How will you be free when the government wants a third of everything you spend?
The unfortunate part of all this ballyhoo is that unless and until government is reduced in scope and size, it will not be any cheaper. Changing the way the money is collected just isn't going to do that. Unless and until the people rise up on their hind legs and tell their legislators they do not want money spent, (something tough to get because the targeted groups of liberal spending are almost always those which have a handy class of people easily portrayed as victims for agitprop purposes, to justify making government grow), it isn't going to happen. By using the omnibus freebie, the servants of the public in COngress are able to buy their way out of opposition with your money, because you (OK, maybe not you personally, but the electorate), LET THEM!
You still have the freedom to vote the b@st@rds out!
It's your money, demand more for it, and quit whining about being the slave of your servants.
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.