So in your world, everything is black or white? If a person opposes the Fair Tax, s/he is a ‘IRSer’?
That’s sophomoric.
Oh...talk about no sense of humor! LOL...it is ok to give labels but not ok when getting one?
Ah...you so fonny, you by my numba won, luv yu long time.
“So in your world, everything is black or white? If a person opposes the Fair Tax, s/he is a ‘IRSer’?
That’s sophomoric.”
Not really. If someone opposes the FT and they have a tax reform proposal which they want to advocate, most FTers are happy to debate. Most of the FT’s critics obviously don’t care for real tax reform (if judged by their actions), they just want to attack the FT and its supporters. Their agenda is very transparent, even though they don’t realize it.
The default situation is a continuation of the current highly dysfunctional system; that isn’t even debatable. Either a single plan emerges which is widely viewed as an alternative to it, or it will continue, at least until it collapses of its own enormous weight or creates major economic disruption. Right now the FT has emerged as the most viable alternative to that system and, as such, is seen by the defenders of the status quo as a threat.
I personally would love to see a flat tax proposal that all flat taxers could rally around. As it stands right now, there is no such thing as “the flat tax”. If you ask 5 flat taxers what specific proposal they support, you are likely to get at least 4 different answers (or none at all) and none of them will be the Burgess bill, the only flat tax proposal in the house. And yet, you still see posters on FR say that they support “the flat tax” as if it were a specific proposal and not merely a form of taxation.
Many (but not all) of the SQLs are too cowardly to admit that they have a vested interest in perpetuating the current system. They realize that the system that they have learned how to game, or how to exploit for their own personal benefit in some way is tremendously unpopular with the American people.