As far as the rest like it winning all debates, I don't think so, though it has made a good initial showing in a few committees, but still, 76 some odd supporters after almost a decade?
And there are more than just one objection to the “Fair Tax”, such as what it will do to the sale of new goods, the housing market, how will the new larger tax amounts will be handled by the credit community since it is not asset that can be held as collateral.
And those are just for starters...
There are also serious concerns about evasion and the evolution of a tax free black market, concerns about the creeping up of the rate, the theoretical concept of a 22% embedded tax and will the cost of good really go down, the creation of an entirely new bureaucracy to manage the prebate and the delivery of checks/funds to every household on a monthly/quarterly/whatever basis.
There is the societal issue I, as well as others, have raised about the inequity of the tax, the fact that those who desire to live a good life such as many enjoy now will be the ones who will have the burden of supporting the nation while cheap bastards who live like paupers despite making the same income pay nothing. Yes, it's a choice, but a bad one, one that will doom the FT among voters since they will be given the choice, live a lower life style or be stuck with the check by the cheap SOB down the street who enjoys the same military protection, highways and other benefits as you do for nothing. Yeah that will go over like a lead balloon in our consumer driven economy.
I have seen these objections addressed with circular arguments and theoretical rhetoric time and time again, but no one has the guts to say that they don't know exactly how some of these things will work out in reality, just that it is "hoped' that this that and the other will happen and it "should" all work out if all businesses and institutions will do the right thing. Sorry, I live in the real world.
The “Fair Tax” has yet to be taken seriously enough to see real opposition. It will enjoy a good ride for sometime since the tide against the current system grows daily, but in the end it will be at best a catalyst for discussions on real ideas about finally reforming the tax system in favor of something the is really fair to all citizens, and for that I am thankful to it and its supporters.
I suggest you revisit post #13 and see that there are facts that Fred Thompson voted on accasion in ways that would never be considered conservative.
Now I personally believe Fred Thompson is conservative but I would never cast disparaging remarks as you did, actually slurs, at the poster in #13 especially as he presented factual data in a cohesive way. The thing to do in such a case is to compare and contrast the many conservative votes Fred Thompson made and put the votes mentioned in post #13 in context.
I would also never carry over an observation on one issue to another issue as you did. That MAN50D believes Fred Thompson voted in non-conservative ways does not diminish the merits of a tax reform proposal.
freerepublic.com was once a forum that many highly accomplished and publicly known posters in anonymity used to gather around. Many of these fine posters have dispersed to other venues because of the childish heckling and substandard level of discourse that took root in the forums.
IOW ‘brain rot’ and other such are noninformative, distasteful, substandard and disruptive.
You added HOT AIR and nothing more. Apparently you are proud of that.
Now that you have raised objections to the FairTax proposal I will address those in the next post. I can already see you have drank the koolaid put out by the propagandists. I will show you where.
The current tax code collects at multiple points throughout the supply chain causing prices to be higher at the retail end by about 20% - 22%. Retailers recoup the resultant higher overhead, the higher cost of goods sold and the higher cost of labor they utilize by raising prices. When you or I purchase a service or product from a retailer, we are paying to that retailer a price that includes a federal tax burden that was landed on the retailer by all those involved in bringing the item to market.
All the tax siphoning from materials, warehouses, transport, marketing and distributing get shunted to the retail end of the supply chain under the FairTax. The federal government will collect the FairTax through tax authorities at the endpoint of the supply chain, not in-between. This unleashes a huge efficiency.
There are also serious concerns about evasion and the evolution of a tax free black market, concerns about the creeping up of the rate, the theoretical concept of a 22% embedded tax and will the cost of good really go down, the creation of an entirely new bureaucracy to manage the prebate and the delivery of checks/funds to every household on a monthly/quarterly/whatever basis.
There are always concerns about tax evasion and the FairTax legislation contains tough enforcement provisions. You and others seem to think that law-abiding people will suddenly decide to become felons and risk all they have to skirt around new tax law. That's preposterous. Criminals will always exist, the FairTax or any tax code is not legislation to reform criminals. The FairTax does make it tougher for tax evaders. The FairTax will be tougher for them because there will be fewer points of collection as about 3,000 retailers currently handle more than 70% of retail sales. Those retailers are largely computerized thus relieving law enforcement and therby allowing them to chase down many of the petty evaders that get away with committing tax crime now.
Increase in tax evasion and 'black market' growth are but two scare tactics the propagandists put out. Tax evasion and black markets exist now. It is a stretch to believe a great many ***more people as a percentage*** will decide to participate in felonies. As always, the government will prosecute evaders and make a big show of it, leaving anyone with thoughts of committing a felony in fear.
As to a creeping rate, the rate can change yearly. I doubt that voters will allow more of their spending to go to federal sales taxes. That will be a hard sale for any Congress to achieve. This concern is non-legit because it presupposes that there is not now an upward creep under the current tax code. In fact there is rate creep under the current tax code and it is difficult to see, and this difficulty suits tax lobbyists just fine as they enjoy obfuscation of true tax rates; they abhor and shun any form or proposal for transparent tax rates. The FairTax is completely transparent; too bad for lobbyists on K Street.
As for the 'theoretical' percent of embedded taxes, that is no longer a theoretical figure but a field-verified range estimate from ongoing studies on supply chain federal tax burdens. The estimates range from 18% to 30% with the concentration between 20% and 22%.
As for costs going down, that depends on inflation and market performance. Those things being constant, of course a retailer will lower prices because everyone will expect them to do so and because their competitors will if they don't. I have held many discussions and seminars with business owners and principals and each say that if they see a drop in overhead, cost of goods sold, an elimination of capital gains, corporate profits and compliance costs, then of course they will drop prices because they realize they will have to add the replacement federal sales tax. Sales are largely a function of price and volume. Business owners tend to know their market better than any others and they know what price the market will bear. For them there is no question they will drop prices. For regulated entities such as utilities, they will drop their prices and rates because the public mandated tariff they operate under will direct them to do so.
As for creating an 'entirely new bureaucracy' to handle the Rebate, that is patently FALSE. The legislation clearly states that DHHS will estimate the poverty rate as they do now and the SSA will handle the Rebate. Those are not new bureacracies. Nor will they be burdened further with sending out more checks, the federal government is very good at printing checks and mailing them or wiring them to accounts. One need look no further than the current tax rebates to see that the government can manage FairTax Rebates very well.
There is the societal issue I, as well as others, have raised about the inequity of the tax, the fact that those who desire to live a good life such as many enjoy now will be the ones who will have the burden of supporting the nation while cheap bastards who live like paupers despite making the same income pay nothing. Yes, it's a choice, but a bad one, one that will doom the FT among voters since they will be given the choice, live a lower life style or be stuck with the check by the cheap SOB down the street who enjoys the same military protection, highways and other benefits as you do for nothing. Yeah that will go over like a lead balloon in our consumer driven economy.
Consumption is robust because there are things people must have and those necessities make up the vast percentage of retail sales. Pusrchases of new boats, cars, airplanes, expensive vacations, etc. are a minor percentage of gross national consumption. Annual consumption is much more steady, much less volatile than annual income, just ask anyone that has experience in tax collections for the State of California.
States that have sales taxes only with no income tax experience a sounder forecast in revenues.
Once again you resort to unsubstantiated hyperbole by saying the FairTax will be "doomed" by those choosing to save. It is all HOT AIR backed by nothing of merit. The facts say different. And you show your attitude of ill-will towards others with remarks such as "cheap bastards", "cheap SOB" which of course expose your true colors. It becomes more clear that you are programmed to put down others to cover up your own failings. Your comments show you to be severely lacking.
I have seen these objections addressed with circular arguments and theoretical rhetoric time and time again, but no one has the guts to say that they don't know exactly how some of these things will work out in reality, just that it is "hoped' that this that and the other will happen and it "should" all work out if all businesses and institutions will do the right thing. Sorry, I live in the real world.
Once again you come up short because you don't understand or won't understand so you resort to hand waving and lashing out. You did not list these objections that caused circular reasoning. As for your 'objections' above, there is nothing circular in my responses. You live in an angry world, not the real world.
The “Fair Tax” has yet to be taken seriously enough to see real opposition. It will enjoy a good ride for sometime since the tide against the current system grows daily, but in the end it will be at best a catalyst for discussions on real ideas about finally reforming the tax system in favor of something the is really fair to all citizens, and for that I am thankful to it and its supporters.
The FairTax has seen plenty of opposition to know that the merits of the system are sound and to know who the real enemy is. Socialists and tax lobbyists are the root of those that have taken their fear to the level of a propaganda war. And that is where the battle lies now.