Posted on 08/01/2004 6:08:53 PM PDT by NeoCaveman
Boy, that sure brings back memories!
Ol' pigdong used to post that tripe all the time
but I think he got downsized and laid-off when they had some budget cutbacks at NRST shill headquarters a couple years ago...
It's really sad. He used to come up with some truly idiotic statements:
"A home is NOT an investment, W/G, but merely a place to live."
Posted on 03/26/2001 16:27:50 PST by pigdog
"(BTW... thanks! Sometimes I forget to collect the gems I occasionally create.
It saves me quite a bit of time if I don't have to constantly reinvent the good ones!)"
A legend in his own mind .... reminds me of LewisLynn/balrog666/YourNightmare, etc., etc., etc.
Is an oversized, outlandish ego a requirement to become a FairTax basher or is this just coincidence?
Adjust for a conservative $800 billion cost of tax compliance, (The Flat Tax; Hall & Rabushka, '95,What the Income Tax Costs the American People: quoting James L. Payne estimates 65cents for each dollar of revenue collected). Total tax related factors affecting consumption price = (800 + 586.5) = $1386.5billionsAG, we've been through this before. The $800 billion from Payne includes individual tax compliance cost (besides it's outdated and grossly overestimates the "costs" of compliance). Individual compliance costs have nothing to do with consumption prices. Your numbers are off dramatically. You know this, yet you still post it.
If I found out they were all the same person, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised.
The shallow crudeness of their rhetoric is almost identical.
Your last point is not coherent. From the consumer's point of view, the true taxes in purchases are unknown. And respected studies show the true tax rate to be the bulk of the product price.If "incidence of corporate taxes" is incoherent to you, you need to go educate yourself.
Readers will notice that I posted the posts from your suggested thread in their entirety, so that folks can get the context.
You post one post of pigdog's, out of context, and somehow think that means you won every debate.
Your hubris and willingness to twist the facts is monumental, still.
3) Do you like our current system and do you think it is fair now?I don't like it but I like it better than the current FairTax proposal.
If the GOP makes it clear that abolishing the IRS and income tax is a major part of its platform, we could very well get a super-majority this November in both houses.
You don't understand. I don't have a need to know my state sales tax. I only need control my purchases. The sales taxes are visible at the time of purchase.
If I wanted to, for some reason I have no idea now, if I wanted to track my purchases and sales taxes, I could very simply do so through my credit or bank card statements.
Again you are barking up the wrong tree. I think you now take it as some sort of personal contest rather than an intellectual discussion.
Let me see if I understand your flawed logic.
"The NRST or similar tax reform will not make taxes anymore visible."
Is that what you are trying to say? Well it is wrong. Please don't take that personal. If you are wrong, admit you are wrong.
If the above is what you trying to claim, then please consider that every purchase you make under a NRST would have a line that computes the taxes paid. So it's NOT invisible. You may not track it or save it, but it IS VISIBLE for those that want to see it.
That is not the case with the income tax which is hidden in the price of a product.
Alternatives?
Is an oversized, outlandish ego a requirement to become a FairTax basher or is this just coincidence?Is gullibility a requirement for being a FairTax supporter or is this just a coincidence?
Again you did not answer the question. You are changing the point of discussion. This shows you can't backup your claim.
Ok, enough of you now. You are not adding anything. You have been reduced to spinning.
It was not my intention to back you into a corner. It was my intention to help your understanding and I failed because you are unwilling to acknowledge your error.
I have people here on FR correct me or inform me on several occasions on several topics. That's a benefit of this discussion board. It's a learning tool.
Hmmmm....
Income tax: Invasive of taxpayer privacy. Voluminous recordkeeping required, records which can be used against said taxpayer in a court of law.
NRST: nonivasive of taxpayer privacy. No recordkeeping required of individual taxpayer.
Income tax: Penalizes domestic producers of products and services while rewarding foreign producers of products and services who sell in our market.
NRST: Ends penalty and burden on domestic producers, while finally taxing foreign producers who sell in our market.
Income tax: Requires huge IRS bureacracy to administer.
NRST: Ends IRS and implements what all the experts admit is the THE most efficient form of tax collection.
This list could grow very long, if I had the time today.
But your claim that somehow the current system is superior to the FairTax just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Objective facts destroy your contentions, and you are giving no contending facts to back up your assertions.
You don't understand. I don't have a need to know my state sales tax. I only need control my purchases. The sales taxes are visible at the time of purchase.So you don't know how much you paid in state sales taxes but they are visible. I can tell you precisely how much I paid in income and payroll taxes and somehow they are hidden.
You've graduated from petulant poster to a thread moron.
Obviously you are interesting in twisting the point to irrelevancy.
Anyone with a H.S. diploma can go back and read the thread and see that you are blowing smoke.
I am going to ignore you now and most I'm sure would agree that's a wise decision.
IThe $800 billion from Payne includes individual tax compliance cost (besides it's outdated and grossly overestimates the "costs" of compliance). Individual compliance costs have nothing to do with consumption prices.
LOL, You've tried that tactic before remember?
Your numbers are off dramatically. You know this, yet you still post it.
Yep my numbers are off considerably, towards the low end. So of course I post it.
Rather than go around in circles with you once again on this folks can go on over to where we discussed this the last time.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1160242/posts?page=497#497
Bottomline.
The $800 billion estimate is a conservative value for the cost of compliance on business factors affecting price alone.
All of the studies that I have read lead me to agree with your assessment.
3) Do you like our current system and do you think it is fair now?
I don't like it but I like it better than the current FairTax proposal.
Hmmm!
"A hand from Washington will be stretched out and placed upon every man's business; the eye of the federal inspector will be in every man's counting house....The law will of necessity have inquisical features, it will provide penalties, it will create complicated machinery. Under it men will be hauled into courts distant from their homes. Heavy fines imposed by distant and unfamiliar tribunals will constantly menace the tax payer. An army of federal inspectors, spies, and detectives will descend upon the state."
-- Virginian House Speaker Richard E. Byrd, 1910, predicting the consequences of an income tax.
| I discussed the importance of abolishing the income tax because of its tendency to form a habit of servility in the souls of a people that accepts it. Servility of soul is bad not only in itself, it is also an open door through which will soon walk the abuses of ambitious government power. Leaders who find themselves with governmental power over a servile people will be quick to conclude that such a people exist to serve them. |
There was good reason why Karl Marx and the Communist Party makes the progressive/graduated income tax the 2nd plank of the Manifesto of the Communist Party, by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, published in 1848. We should never forget nor overlook the philosophical underpinnings of that choice:
"The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state ... . Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property ... . These measures will, of course, be different in different countries. Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in he hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. "
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.