[eeriegeno]

BillyBob, I agree with you 100%. Millions of retirees will be slammed twice with a consumption tax. I say that a flat tax needs to be put in place. With NO exemptions or exclusions. You earn 'x' bucks, you pay 3,4,5% (whatever is needed to generate funds to run the fed gubbmint.) Also, what is also needed drastically is a check on gov't spending. Zero based budgeting was a good idea. Most folks would be outraged if they could read the federal budget line items and what each item costs.

[Principled]

No. Retirees will have NO additional tax burden due to an nrst.

Who started that anyway?

Retirees ALREADY pay tax when they purchase. The fact that they'll pay tax when they spend their savings is nothing new. They'll spend no more on taxes under an nrst than what they pay now.

What makes you think they'll pay more due to an nrst???

[Taxman]

I must presume then, professor, that in your calculus, the flat income tax will not pass along any tax cost of government to seniors?

Have you read the freaking bill? Look it up on Thomas in the 107th Congress! H.R. 1040.

The Flat Income Tax is a Value Added Tax on the business side and a Flat Income Tax on the personal side. Who, exactly, do you think businesses will pass their Value Added Tax on to?

Consumers!

Jeez -- get your facts straight before you jump in and support just another income tax which, BTW, will cause the IRS to become even more disrespectful of your personal liberty and Constitutional rights!

Think outside the box: If you like the Flat Income Tax, you will love the National Retail Sales Tax!