Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Case for the 'FairTax'
Wall Street Journal Online ^ | March 7, 2005 | Laurence J. Kotlikoff

Posted on 03/08/2005 9:20:44 AM PST by n-tres-ted

Our tax code is a mess for a reason. Special interests pay for special favors. And with 17,000 pages and counting, there's plenty of places for our politicians to hide the kickbacks. Meanwhile, all the exemptions, deductions, exceptions and special provisions reduce the tax base, which means higher tax rates and smaller incentives for individuals and companies to produce income. And whether the tax breaks are set in fine print or spelled out in bold type, they generally favor the rich, making our tax system less progressive than is generally believed.

No tax system is perfect, but ours is so awful that fundamental reform is the only option. Fundamental reform is not just a necessity; it's also an opportunity to stop taxing income and start taxing consumption. My colleagues and I have been studying income and consumption taxation via computer simulations for some time now. We've found that switching from taxing wage and capital income to taxing consumption can significantly improve economic efficiency and growth. What's more, it can make our tax system much more progressive and generationally equitable.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: fairtax; kotlikoff; taxes; taxreform
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500501-506 next last
To: Principled
The "rent amount" includes costs the landlord pays now that will be gone under the nrst. That's what's being missed. Your myopia is preventing you from becoming informed.

It appears your idiocy is preventing you from understanding what "contract" means under the law.

The rent amount will not be changed by the NRST because the NRST cannot arbitrarily change the terms of any pre-existing contract.

481 posted on 03/09/2005 10:42:55 AM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 480 | View Replies]

To: 4edm 4ever
Lewislynn, in your math you forgot the final step.

Lewis had always had a severe math problem - which can be cured. But the real problem is that he uses his faulty math to make assertions.

Daybefore yesterday, IIRC, he insisted for hours that if the nrst eliminated 22% of existing prices and then tacked on 29%, that prices would be wildly higher. He kept to this for hours. Finally, I could't let him dangle any longer - I finally told him his analysis was based on "100-22=88".

He does this often.

482 posted on 03/09/2005 10:45:17 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 479 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
The rent amount will not be changed by the NRST because the NRST cannot arbitrarily change the terms of any pre-existing contract.

Nobody but you is saying the rent amount will be changed by the nrst.

What is being said is that after implementing the nrst, landlords will change the rent in their contracts to an amount that maximizes their profits.

483 posted on 03/09/2005 10:47:12 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 481 | View Replies]

To: Principled
If there's a simpler way, why not use it?
I agree. Talk to your buds at the AFT about it.

Let me know how it comes out, OK?
484 posted on 03/09/2005 10:47:16 AM PST by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 477 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare
I agree. Talk to your buds at the AFT about it.

Why would I care what they say? I have my own preferences as to which method to use in different situations.

485 posted on 03/09/2005 10:48:47 AM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 484 | View Replies]

To: Principled
The "rent amount" includes costs the landlord pays now that will be gone under the nrst. That's what's being missed. Your myopia is preventing you from becoming informed.
What costs are those?
486 posted on 03/09/2005 10:51:03 AM PST by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 480 | View Replies]

To: elbucko

I've also worried about that (see the previous thread on this topic). The proponents of Fair Tax claim that perhaps $700B of inefficiency/compliance costs will be removed. I have pointed out that most of that is labor, and probably equates to 15-20 million jobs which would have to disappear to achieve that kind of savings. It's hard to see how that, plus a large new consumption tax, would not bring on a major recession.


487 posted on 03/09/2005 10:59:24 AM PST by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 460 | View Replies]

To: Principled
What is being said is that after implementing the nrst, landlords will change the rent in their contracts to an amount that maximizes their profits.

Sure, when the current lease expires or gets renewed.

You really think GM is going to rewrite every car lease they hold to give away some of their profits just because the NRST passes? Dream on...

488 posted on 03/09/2005 11:04:11 AM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 483 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare
What costs are those?

It's all too obvious that there are none.

Sometimes I wonder how these NRST fanatics even make spending decisions in their personal lives when they don't understand basic economics or the law.

489 posted on 03/09/2005 11:06:56 AM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 486 | View Replies]

To: elbucko
My first post on this thread to this subject was that I believe a consumption tax will lead to a deep economic depression. I see no reason to defend that opinion. That is my opinion and as long as it is opposite to yours, any evidence to support my position will be dismissed out of hand. This thread is not a debate, but an inquisition, however, I am not compelled by anyones opinion of me to quote chapter and verse the facts and reasons for my opinion. Therefore, your position on my posts is irrelevant to me.

You aren't alone in that conclusion. The unsupported idea that prices will drop 20% or more is ludicrous and the idea that consumers will continue to spend profligately when prices go up steeply is both a violation of basic economics and complete misunderstanding of consumer behavior with respect to pricing.

490 posted on 03/09/2005 11:17:24 AM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 460 | View Replies]

To: Diamond

"cast off"...get rid of, be done with......refuse to provide.

Under the FairTax, registration for the prebate is voluntary, not mandatory so I won't be needing my SSN for that purpose....

If reporting wages to the SSA is done for the sole purpose of calculating benefits, and NOT calculating a tax due, I hope that reporting wages will likewise become voluntary...in which case, I will decline.....

Healthcare may be a bit of a conundrum. Tim Murphy, (PA-R, 18th Congressional District) is proposing a massive tracking system, ostensibly to minimize medical errors through seemless information exchange. The details of this plan, while just a plan, remain elusive...and I suspect it is but a piece of a national healthcare initiative....Hit-lary care incrementalism.....I further suspect that there will be some national identifier for this purpose.....probably the SSN. As you know, the SSN is the defacto identifier now......and we need to get away from this and I will fight it to the best of my ability.


491 posted on 03/09/2005 12:10:06 PM PST by Conservative Goddess (Veritas vos Liberabit, in Vino, Veritas....QED, Vino vos Liberabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 441 | View Replies]

To: expatpat

John Sanford is a lefty too,but a good fiction writer.


As with most any laws, the more confusing and convoluted, the better for the lawyers and codetalkers.


492 posted on 03/09/2005 12:25:48 PM PST by Rakkasan1 (Keep capitol punishment safe,legal , and rare...shoot the perp in the head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 458 | View Replies]

To: expatpat

John Sanford (John Camp)is a lefty too,but a good fiction writer.


As with most any laws, the more confusing and convoluted, the better for the lawyers and codetalkers.


493 posted on 03/09/2005 12:26:08 PM PST by Rakkasan1 (Keep capitol punishment safe,legal , and rare...shoot the perp in the head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 458 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Goddess
I hope that reporting wages will likewise become voluntary...in which case, I will decline.....

Ok, I understand now.

Cordially,

494 posted on 03/09/2005 12:26:58 PM PST by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 491 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Goddess
As you know, the SSN is the defacto identifier now......and we need to get away from this and I will fight it to the best of my ability.

SSN's are not unique so they should never be used for identification purposes anyway.

495 posted on 03/09/2005 12:30:09 PM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 491 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

Thank you for your response. It has been a while since I have read the entire proposed legislation, could you please direct me to the portion which states that real estate purchased for rental purposes would not be subject to the sales tax. Thanks.


496 posted on 03/09/2005 1:10:49 PM PST by Finger Monkey (H.R. 25, Fair Tax Act - do the research, contact your legislators, get this puppy passed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 470 | View Replies]

To: balrog666

"You are truly a fool - I don't know too many landlords, and certainly no commercial renters, who don't call out sales taxes as additional payments on top of rent and the responsibility of the leasee. You do the math. The renter pays it.

In my buildings the renter will pay it or be evicted. Welcome to the NRST."

"Are your buildings residential or commercial?"

"Both."

Do me a favor, balrog. Will you let me know, after the FairTax passes, when the first court date is for your eviction of a commercial tenant for not paying the sales tax that you levy on him?

I want to be there to see the look on your face when the judge tells you that the FairTax doesn't apply to business inputs and throws your eviction action out.


497 posted on 03/09/2005 2:07:03 PM PST by phil_will1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 478 | View Replies]

To: phil_will1
Do me a favor, balrog. Will you let me know, after the FairTax passes, when the first court date is for your eviction of a commercial tenant for not paying the sales tax that you levy on him?

No court date needed in Florida to evict a nonpaying tenant. I can just padlock the doors and have the sheriff remove them.

I want to be there to see the look on your face when the judge tells you that the FairTax doesn't apply to business inputs and throws your eviction action out.

"Business inputs"? Is that a new economics term? Is it in the NRST? No? Then perhaps you should explain what you think you mean in plain English.

498 posted on 03/09/2005 2:22:10 PM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 497 | View Replies]

To: balrog666

"'Business inputs'? Is that a new economics term? Is it in the NRST? No? Then perhaps you should explain what you think you mean in plain English."

NRST stands for National RETAIL Sales tax. It is levied on personal consumption only. Rent on a commercial building is NOT personal consumption.

You have never heard the term "Business inputs"? Interesting.


499 posted on 03/09/2005 2:27:38 PM PST by phil_will1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 498 | View Replies]

To: balrog666

"No court date needed in Florida to evict a nonpaying tenant. I can just padlock the doors and have the sheriff remove them."

Well, that should be an interesting situation when they file against you in court on the basis that the tax you are levying against them does not apply.


500 posted on 03/09/2005 2:29:29 PM PST by phil_will1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 498 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500501-506 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson