Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Principled
Imagine if we only changed the method of collection in that we abolish withholding and require folks to pay in cash - out of their checking accounts.

Wow. Imagine if we required the Government not spend money it did not have?

It is not so much how the people pay their bills, but the way the Government is incurring debt far beyond our ability to pay.

Until then, we will keep trying to cover the blank checks we have given them, and they are on a spending spree.

It makes no difference, divert the Amazon at flood stage into the bucket, you will never fill it if there is no bottom in it.

Have you ever bought anything in Canada? Add in the GST, PST, and VAT, and the price nearly doubles.

Government was intended to be a servant, not a life-theratening parasite. It needs to be put back in the role of servant.

As for the 'pre-bate' taking the 'sting' out of poverty level living, phooey.

If you are going to tax people at all levels, might as well tick off the ones who don't have/won't get a job, they are the ones who will have the time to raise hell with the government while the rest of us are working like dogs to feed the kids and pay the taxes on it.

How do you think we ended up with so many squeaky wheels getting greased on the backs of productive people in the first place?

If this isn't a Socialist program, then I challenge you to do away with anything which appears to be a 'gimmie'.

People aren't going to pay as much attention to the tax as the check from 'Unca Suga' every month, and you know it.

Additionally, I still maintain that those under this system who have to replace items stolen or deatroyed will have their misfortune compounded by having to pay additional taxes beyond what the average person would, with no real options to do otherwise.

And that those who require expensive but necessary medical treatment to stay alive will have that misfortune equally compounded by having to pay taxes on those treatments far and above the "average poverty level" of medical care, (whatever that is).

Why whatever that is?

The really poor don't pay for their medical care.

The rest of us do.

So calculate the cost of publicly paid for medicine to the recipient living in public housing, getting food stamps, fuel assistance, etc.

WHAT COST?

For the really poor in this country, those on the dole, the average cost of necessities is pretty low, and if you issue a check for the taxes on that amount, it isn't going to cover squat.

Is that the 'average' your check will be based on in the year when your house burns down, your car is stolen, and your wife has to go in for chemo and radiation after cancer surgery?

Under the current tax laws, someone suffering any or all of those misfortunes can take deductions: their tax load is mitigated in the event of misfortune.

Under the fair tax, it is amplified.

I am well aware that " Life ain't fair", but no matter how you slice the fair tax under those circumstances, it isn't "fair" either.

I cannot support any tax system which would compound the miseries of those among us who suffer extraordinary misfortune as the 'fair' tax would.

Those who seem to think this is not the case seem to have no idea of the costs of replacing a household's goods from the ground up, the losses involved in the theft of a vehicle, nor the expense (and lost income) which may be associated with a devastating medical condition such as cancer.

They would compound the devastation inherent in such events with another 30% (twenty three, whatever the government decides the number will be this month) tacked onto the top.

The necessities, food, primary residence, medical care, and energy should not be taxed, nor should any checks be issued to mitigate taxes on the remainder.

Then those suffering extraordinary losses would not be penalized under the system for those things they need to simply stay alive.

How about the tomatoes you trade the neighbor for fresh eggs? How is the government going to tax that? Send them three out of ten?

Consider this. The means are Constitutionally present to raise enough to satisfy the budget and pay down debt. It has been done, but you have to look a ways back.

There was no income tax, either.

The salient differences are that the government of the day was tremendously more limited in scope. We were not trying to be policeman to the world, but busy building a nation--ours; something which we will get to do again as soon as the idiots are done tearing it down.

116 posted on 12/21/2008 12:19:42 PM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies ]


To: Smokin' Joe

waaaaaaaaaaaay too long.

sorry.


117 posted on 12/21/2008 1:28:44 PM PST by Principled (They used the CRA to undermine capitalism. They're using ACORN to undermine democracy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson