[Wolfie]

Those are all valid choices. But for the earner on the low-end of the income scale, its less likely to be a choice than a matter of what they can afford. That's where they get hit with reduced buying power under the NRST. Get back to a flat tax on income, and I'm happily on board.

[numberonepal]

Get back to a flat tax on income, and I'm happily on board.

How 'bout you happily reveal your private matters to unknown government entities, and I'll tell them and other Nosy Parker's to kiss my a$$?

[Eagle of Liberty]

Those are all valid choices. But for the earner on the low-end of the income scale, its less likely to be a choice than a matter of what they can afford. That's where they get hit with reduced buying power under the NRST. Get back to a flat tax on income, and I'm happily on board.

The low-end will always have less buying power no matter what the plan is. In fact, under a flat tax, you will not be giving a rebate based on the poverty level, whereas under the Fair Tax bill, you will. Those that hover around the poverty level will pay virtually no taxes.

Please read:

Is it fair for rich people to get the exact same FairTax rebate from the federal government as the poorest person in America

Here is the whole Fair Tax FAQ:

Fair Tax FAQ

[phil_will1]

"That's where they get hit with reduced buying power under the NRST."

Lower income individuals don't experience reduced buying power under the FairTax. First, corporate income and payroll taxes are removed, as well as the staggering associated compliance costs. Elimination of these costs wilenable competiton to drive pre-tax prices down 20 - 25%. Although the tax is levied on top to bring prices back to about where they were (for US produced goods), the rebate offsets sales taxes up to the poverty level. Therefore, to the extent that US consumers choose to purchase US produced goods, they will experience a 20 - 25% INCREASE in purchasing power.

Of course, to the extent that they choose to purchase imports, they will pay more than they do now under the current system. That is the price we pay to eliminate the bias in our system in favor of foreign producers.

[CSM]

Wolfie,

In all the discussion about regressive being bad, can you explain to me why? I don't understand how motivating persons to work harder and giving them actual rewards when they do work harder is considered a negative thing. Isn't that better than punishing those that work harder, therefore creating incentives to remain in the current station of life?