White House Floats Idea of Dropping Income Tax (altogether)

New York Times, Business and Financial Desk, Page 14, Column 5 ^ | 2/8/2003 | EDMUND L. ANDREWS

[Billy_bob_bob]

Let me put it this way, if I believed that the nrst had ANY chance of being implemented the way it is worded, I would support it. However, I am afraid that it has NO chance whatsoever of being implemented this way, and would eventually devolve into a VAT. Ick.

So you're right, I'm not saying the idea is a bad idea, I'm saying that our government is a bad government, and will twist and subvert anything we try to do to improve things into something that will make things worse. If I had ANY confidence in our government whatsoever then I would possibly agree with the nrst, since I do not I'm in favor of sticking with the Devil I know rather than dancing with the Devil I don't know.

[Gunslingr3]

Well, a major reason for the nrst is to eliminate that lobby. That's why there are no exceptions. Income and investments are tax-free. Personal retail consumption is taxed. End of discussion.

I don't think this is as simple as you would like to make it. Will you try to make me pay the tax if I buy the goods from someone with a classified ad? What about on the internet? How do you enforce? Do you tax all food as well? You say that investments are not taxed, would that include buying title to futures? If you buy the title to futures, you bought the good. Could you just keep it, or would it become a taxed good at some point. Also, that hefty of a tax is going to provide that large of a profit motive to the black market. Remember, this nation was founded in part by smugglers like John Hancock and Samuel Adams... I prefer excise taxes to a flat, all inclusive sales tax, because it puts the final taxing authority back in the hands of the people as the Founders intended. If I'm really sick of what the government is devoting tax money to, I can avoid the goods they tax. A nrst just gives them a different stick. It might start at 5, 10, 20%, but if there is no escape from it, you can only expect it to grow. Afterall, the income tax was only a few percent, and only applied to a small segment of American society when it was first introduced...

[ApesForEvolution]

"Wrong, I would prefer just about anything else, if it wasn't for the fact that I know that whatever we do to try to improve the situation will only make it worse. That's what you get when you deal with something as unprincipled and untrustworthy as the U.S. government."

You would prefer anything else but because you haven't taken the time to educate yourself about the Fair Tax (and its authors) you would settle for the most intrusive, unconstitutional and unfair taxation scheme in the world????

I would really prefer to go back to the Constitutional way of raising government revenues, through tariffs on imported goods. Of course, the odds of that happening are exactly nil, so why bother?I totally agree but if we don't bother, then why not just jump off a bridge because we're too stupid, lazy or patriotic to make a positive difference?? You can't have it both ways.

[Principled]

I see it getting worse and I'm not going to delude myself into thinking that politicians are going to stop demanding more taxes for their pork barrel programs so they can be re-elected.

Well, under the current system, a pol can tax one group to buy votes from another group. The nrst stops that cold.

Under the nrst, pols will have to raise taxes equally on ALL individuals to obtain an increase.

[ApesForEvolution]

What's really pathetic is that you are the loudest supporter of Pat on this forum. Bush II is infinitely better than Bush I (far, far from my ideal mind you)...but abolishing the IRS and replacing it with a reasonable NRST such as the Fair Tax is genius. Not surprised you don't see this. I rather think you are beyond uninformed and wonder why oh why you would continue on with the IRS gestappo. But then maybe we both know that answer, don't we?!

[Principled]

So you're right, I'm not saying the idea is a bad idea, I'm saying that our government is a bad government, and will twist and subvert anything we try to do to improve things into something that will make things worse...

You sound like George Washington.

However, he said distrust government to the point of vigilance - not to the point of cynical defeatism.

[Principled]

Just spend 10 minutes looking at the bill. Then let's talk. You have valid concerns. Look at the bill please, and then I'd like to discuss, OK?

[Principled]

You would be responsible for paying 23% of gross retail receipts. And you would be paid a quarter point (or $200) per month, whichever is greater, for your service.

Why not spend 10 minutes at fairtax.org or salestax.org?

[Principled]

Except securing food, shelter, and other basic necessities isn't a matter of choice.

That's why necessities are untaxed with the nrst HR25.

[Principled]

A consumption tax would hurt the elderly and poor but a flat tax wouldn't.

EGADS! HR 25 has a negative tax rate for those under the poverty spending level. Did you know that?

HR25 is good for poor folks and folks on fixed incomes.

[Principled]

A "pure" retail sales tax becomes a VAT eventually, for reasons I outlined in a previous post.

It's your previous post that is not cogent.

[Willie Green]

...but abolishing the IRS and replacing it with a reasonable NRST such as the Fair Tax is genius. Not surprised you don't see this.

Over the years, you NRST flying monkeys have proven too dense to understand the economic arguements. Instead you've just continued pasting the same old convoluted and bogus logic spam.

Today I figure I'd just point out the political idiocy. It is political suicide. Heck, the senior citizens alone are enough to bury this in the political dumpster. You don't think the senior citizens know what a sales tax is? Heck, they've had their incomes confiscated all their lives by the income tax. And now that they're finally retired and in much lower tax brackets, you're going to eliminate their low income tax and slap a 30% sales tax on the food, clothes and medicines they buy???

ROTFLMAO! Do you think for one minute they're going to waste their time trying to understand the convoluted mechanism you propose to make it "fair" by tinkering with their Social Security?

Bwhahahaha! The seniors would dump any politician that proposes something like that so fast it'd make your head spin!

[ApesForEvolution]

"And now that they're finally retired and in much lower tax brackets, you're going to eliminate their low income tax and slap a 30% sales tax on the food, clothes and medicines they buy???"

Well, at least now there is no doubt from where you hail: Ignorantville, USA. Yeah, you're right...doing the right thing would require fact, logic and persuasion. And too many Americans are too old, stupid and communist to get it done. Guess we're stuck with your IRS gestappo. /sarcasm /posting to fools that make Pat a .5% national candidate

[Billy_bob_bob]

" However, he said distrust government to the point of vigilance - not to the point of cynical defeatism."

Good advice. I'll try to take it to heart.

If I were to offer one suggestion towards positive change, it would be that to petition government directly is a poorly directed effort. What we really need to do is to arrange to purchase media outlets, like newspapers and television networks. The power of the media to shape public policy is awesome to behold, because when you own the printing press you get to say how much ink gets spilled on which story. No amount of direct political lobbying or organizing or fundraising can match the raw power of mass media to motivate political change.

[Principled]

Yes advertising is key. I recommend writing letters to paper, calling talk shows, being a guest on a radio show, giving a talk to a small group, OR sending a few bucks to a reform organization for them pool with other donations to buy a tv or radio commercial. This is all already happening... and is in large part responsible for the advancement we've seen.

Keep up the fight. Be vigilant-

[Willie Green]

to fools that make Pat a .5% national candidate

Same old arrogant pisant diversionary attacks that NRST flying monkeys are famous for.
If anybody ever dares to seriously challenge even one aspect of their precious tax-scam, they go into a rant declaring how "ignorant and stupid" their opponents are.

Senior citizens aren't stupid. They'd see right through the complexity of the scam and trash it virtually instantaneously. They won't even bother giving you whacknut extremists the time of day. They've heard so much BS in their lifetimes, they'll reject it as the complete and utter nonsense that it is.

[BADROTOFINGER]

I dunno that Detroit would be all that much against it. I used to sell cars, and most people want a new one. They dont want to buy other peoples problem rigs. I could be wrong tho...JFK

[ApesForEvolution]

You're kind of funny in your ignorance...in an extreme kind of way.

[ApesForEvolution]

BTW, where did you get "30% sales tax on the food, clothes and medicines they buy" from? Another delusion or do you actually ever check facts?

[Principled]

If anybody ever dares to seriously challenge even one aspect of their precious tax-scam, they go into a rant declaring how "ignorant and stupid" their opponents are.

Not the way I see it. Most folks welcome debate on tax reform. I haven't seen what you've asserted ("ignorant and stupid") anywhere on this huge thread, except where you have typed it. Perhaps I've missed it.

Regardless, discussion of objections is necessary and productive. I note that the post to which I respond has no objection to the nrst included.