Ancient_Geezer: The key is whether or not you want an Retail tax or one of the versions of income tax.
I’m curious. When Technogeeb worries that one of the two establishment parties may actually have a communist intent with regard to FCA, you consider him, perhaps, overly hyperbolic but otherwise aligned with your support of NRST. When I suggest adjustments to merely make the NRST more comparable to the current distribution of tax burden, you consider it a full blown attack on the essence of NRST. How come?
When I suggest adjustments to merely make the NRST more comparable to the current distribution of tax burden, you consider it a full blown attack on the essence of NRST. How come?
1)Technogeeb is not suggesting that we should hide the tax burden from view of the general electorate nor treat one individual different from another such as the Tobin Tax would.
2) Technogeeb is not suggesting that we increase the tax/FCA rate to compensate for what you feel to be insufficient progressivity.
I can live with particular items tax free, I do however expect that everyone perceive the tax burden equally in terms of rate paid at the register.
Your system would maintain a defacto division in society, those who pay the Tobin Tax and can perceive its effect on their livelyhood, and those who do not. A perceive "Poor" against the perceived "Rich". Such distinctions are tearing this nation apart and warping the judgement of the electorate as a whole.
The NRST is applied the same with every person regardless of economic station. All pay the same rate of tax, all receive the same per person FCA. No artificial distinctions of one group of citizens over another.
That is also known as equal protection of the law. A fundamental concept in our constitution.
I’m curious. When Technogeeb worries that one of the two establishment parties may actually have a communist intent with regard to FCA, you consider him, perhaps, overly hyperbolic but otherwise aligned with your support of NRST. When I suggest adjustments to merely make the NRST more comparable to the current distribution of tax burden, you consider it a full blown attack on the essence of NRST. How come?
I didn't read his response at all like you apparently have chosen to, then again, I retained the context. I understand your mischaracterization. Not as bad as Technogeeb mischaracterization of the FCA as a "redistribution mechanism"877 -- despite having it previously explained to him that it's not redistribution because every household receives an equal size check each month. That is, all single-person households get the same check as do all two-person house holds get the same check as do three-person households get the same check, etc. The distribution is equivalent and not even mandatory. Any person can chose not to receive the monthly checks and mostly that will be the upper income persons that will let their equal share remain as tax revenue. In that sense people by free choice can volunteer to pay more taxes which is very different than having the government with gun-to the-head forcing upper-income persons to pay more taxes.
Taxation is necessary to gain revenue but honest principle, integrity, honoring and protecting individual life-and-property rights are primary unit. All those in bold are violated when taxes are imposed greater on one group than another. It sacrifices a portion of the individual for the supposed betterment of the group. It is collectivist groupthink. Like voting for the lesser of evils always begets evil -- how so many people thinking they're right can be so wrong. Politics, and especially reflected in politics of taxation, suck. Politics suck objectivity out and insert irrationality in. Individual life-and-property rights are primary and must be protected, honored and respected -- not sacrificed.
In practice the FCA is this: For each single-person household the government acknowledges that each of those persons is going to pay $170 in NRST on the necessities they buy each month. Thus, because the government doesn't know which specific necessities each of those millions of single-person households are going to buy rather than exempt a slew of different items that would cause even more politicians and bureaucrats committing "look busy" partisan bickering (work) and special interests' "bribery" forever fighting over what should be exempt and not exempt the government won't exempt anything and just send each single-person household a $170 check each month. Thus cutting out the partisan bickering and special interest bribes that are partially responsible for creating the leviathan government in the first place.