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 ...
Yes, that did it, now I’m convinced.
You convinced yourself that the FT would cause money to magically appear from nowhere long ago.
Yeah, eliminating payroll taxes would be a bad thing, right?
One of us would like to see the IRS neutered and I don’t think it is you.
Having the option to pay some taxes rather than have them mandated on us is a bad thing, right?
Yeah, best to scrap the whole thing since someone might come out a bit ahead and by god we sure resent that, right?
You want taxes to stay the same length.
No, scrap it because someone might figure out how to play the system, cuz we know that with your current system no one ever cheats or loopholes, right?
Enjoy every “revenue neutral” inch.
No, I want taxes reduced. (Don’t go into blatant falsehoods)
But if there was no net change and the IRS vanished it would be a huge victory.
Enjoy your IRS.
The FT is built on a requirement that they not be. The government has to get at least every single cent they get now.
Revenue neutral at the federal level not at the consumer level.
You distort more than cheap sunglasses! LOL
Wow...another brilliant argument!
I have to bow to your brilliance, your wit, your mastery of the issues, your elegance in prose and picture.
But using pictures because you have run out of words?
C’mon...
Your assertion that taxes collected under the FT will exceed taxes paid under FT requires a magic money tree. Or maybe an FT magic fairy.
So someone at the lowest end of the economic scale may derive a small benefit more than they paid, especially if they are frugal and don’t buy anything new at retail?Suddenley the EITC isn't so bad after all? I don't think the Fairtax graph was assuming "the lowest end of the economic scale" purchasing used necessities.
In fact, for most it's much better than the income tax.
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.