Posted on 07/29/2003 7:09:27 AM PDT by Mick2000
Just three years ago, Congress voted to allow more foreign workers into the United States. Times have changed.
Politicians are proposing tough — opponents say misguided — steps to keep jobs at home in the face of rising unemployment, a growing number of white-collar jobs being transferred to India and other countries and lingering anger over some U.S. allies' opposition to the war in Iraq.
The House has passed measures to require the Defense and State departments to buy a larger share of equipment from U.S. firms. The measure, which has provoked a corporate and political uproar, has not been approved by the Senate.
Legislators in several states are trying to bar the export of government jobs to foreign companies.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., chair of a Judiciary subcommittee, plans a hearing today on possible problems in the L-1 visa program, which allows companies to bring workers to the USA from their foreign operations. Workers complain that firms are using the program as a backdoor way to replace domestic employees with cheaper labor.
(Excerpt) Read more at usatoday.com ...
When the cost of the income tax is removed, prices will fall, THEN you add the national retail sales tax and prices come right back to where they were.
Slow down and read more carefully - it is not double minded ar all. One thing happens, then the other. The end result is that prices remain stable.
Did you really think someone be so stupid as to say two different things?
At least, that's how I think I signed up. ;-)
What activities do you feel the federal government should be handling?
How do you propose they fund those activities?
How about that! Two trillion dollars just appear out of thin air! I am impressed, usually it takes Congress and Liberals to come up with magic acts like that. Where they say that a product whose net cost was 'X' yesterday will be 'X' tomorrow and no one will ever pay an income tax again. Plus the majority of people will receive a check from the government at the end of the year. I call BS, the numbers are bogus.
But to deal more directly with your statement that products will be cheaper by 20% (and those numbers are massively inflated), lets go back to the story of two homes. Now you say that the olderhome will not be taxed when sold. Given my scenario where a person contracts for a new home to be built during this amazing 20% savings universe, it still makes the new house cheaper by 20% which exceeds what most people have in equity in their homes.
I really like the tax'd only once to the original owner. I am going to pull a Donald Trump and leverage myself into contracting to build billions of dollars worth of housing before the sales tax, and then sell the houses as "used" in the new economy. Dittos with fleets of cars, trucks, furniture, boats, aircraft, whatever.
I am all for this now. With massive quantities of debt I will be able to retire a trillionaire.
There are three scenarios I can think of off the top of my head:
1. Entrepreneurial Inventor: Here the inventor either has or raises seed capital to facilitate the production, marketing and sales efforts for a product he has secured a patent on. He can either build a company with the internal resources to handle the issues of bringing his product to market or he can outsource the responsibilities to vendors. Most vendors, if it appears they stand to land a lucrative contract will sign non-competition waivers that will not permit them to manufacture and sell the item on their own, work with other competitors, or divulge intellectual property to outside parties.
2. Inventor Sells to Corporation: The inventor sells off the rights to whatever he has developed for a percentage of the products sales, a lump sum, or a combination of the two. Other than collecting royalties he has nothing else to do with it. At this point the individual/corporation retaining the rights chooses how production will be handled and if outsourcing, will most likely require the production facility to agree to non-competition as mentioned above.
3. Management: An individual/corporation identifies a needed product and contracts someone to invent/design/engineer it with the stipulation that it will become the individuals/corporations exclusive property. The inventor/designer/engineer is paid a fee for services. Patent is obtained and outsourcing is done with a vendor willing to agree to the non-comp.
I’m sure that there are more examples and I’m equally sure we could find exceptions to the above but if, in the end, you chose reputable vendors who respect their legally binding agreements, and make sure all your bases are covered, you wont have any difficulties. Your biggest problem will most likely be other competitors who modify or slightly improve your design and patent it on their own.
Huh? What is disappearing? The existing taxes are being replaced. Nothing is disappearing. When did you start thinking that?
Plus the majority of people will receive a check from the government at the end of the year.
You're not reading too well. Checks to cover the tax on necessities are monthly, not yearly, to all those who wish to receive it.
You are new to the national retail sales tax I see. Well, the plan would be 1 or 2% less if necessites weren't exempted - some folks prefer taxing necessities, I don't.
I call BS, the numbers are bogus.
Fine, call them tomatoes if you want, but without something to back the claim, it means nothing. How about sharing why you think the numbers are bogus?
Given my scenario where a person contracts for a new home to be built during this amazing 20% savings universe, it still makes the new house cheaper by 20% which exceeds what most people have in equity in their homes.
Again, there is no amazing savings. The nrst simply trades your income taxes and invisible, embedded taxes hidden in prices for taxes you can see. The nrst is a REPLACEMENT.
Either a good is taxed under our current system via income/payroll etc taxes or it is taxed when sold - not both. New houses will not be any cheaper because they'll have the tax on them to pay, just as previously built homes have a tax on them - it's just hidden in the price...along with the fact that the previously built house had to be purchased with after income tax and after payroll tax dollars.
Regarding the Trump tale... you don't get it yet. When you buy something, it was either produced under the income tax system or not. If it was produced under the income tax system, it has tax built into it making the price higher. If it is produced under the nrst, the cost is less but the addition of the visible tax brings it to the same price.
Either way, the item has the SAME cost.
BTW I'm not trying to convince you of anything, just straighten out your misunderstandings about the nrst.
How you could be so emotional about it without even being familiar with the basics is odd.
BUMP
That is exactly the model we want. Its called "regional-ization"
Unless it’s a matter of fraud (Enron) it is the responsibility of the shareholders to make these CEO’s accountable by voting them out. If you own 600,000 shares of Disney and don’t care that Michael Eisner is running the company into the ground while raking in millions of dollars for himself, you get what you deserve.
The responsibility we need to live up to is making our vote count towards getting rid of all the over regulation and taxation that makes this country unattractive for businesses to operate out of.
OK, look at the current federal budget, then add up all of the state budgets. Now I have no idea what is going to happen to all of the various state income tax agencies, or to the current property taxes or to the current sales and excise taxes, and what will happen to every other form of tax, but I hazard to guess that around two trillion dollars worth of taxes are currently being collected from paychecks by every level of government.
Your magical system says that all of this tax will disappear. OK, two trillion dollars in taxes disappear. But then you say that all of that money will be recovered in sales taxes. OK, so instead of paying two trillion dollars up front, we will pay two trillion dollars out the back when we buy something. Revenue neutral. Right?
But now you say that a product which is priced at 'X' right now, will be 'X' afterwards - even after the taxes are collected. IOW, as far as individuals are concerned, they don't pay two trillion on the front (in withholding) AND they don't have to pay two trillion on the back (because the costs of the goods makes up the difference).
So where did this two trillion dollars come from?
You are new to the national retail sales tax I see.
No, that is not true. You NRST people can't make your minds what will be taxed, at what rate, who is exempt, who is not, what is exempt, what is not, if taxed at what rate, how much is refundable, what isn't refundable and a whole hodge-podge of details that aren't settled. This is where the lie of NRST comes in. You hold this Utopian view of two trillion dollars coming from nowhere, then when challenged on the details, start giving conflicting information that just happens to be the best parts of every plan that has been offered.
If I take ten different plans that are radically different but are only common in that they are some variant of a sales tax with refunds, and I ignore all the objectionable stuff but keep all of the good stuff, then I too can magically come up with two trillion dollars each year. The pro-NRST web sites are full of propangada and all are nothing but sunshine and daisies. They are scant on detail and profuse on overly optimistic conjecture. When I ask you about this or that, you grab the best numbers and ignore the balancing bad numbers.
If the NRST was the savior of all mankind, then why doesn't a single country on the planet implement this scheme? How about any state in the union?
The nrst is a REPLACEMENT
Execept that it finds two trillion dollars each year in 'found' money.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.