My position on posts coming from posters who apparently haven't read, much less understood the subject of discussion carry little weight in the debate...anyone can make a general statement that I think something is good or bad, but based on what? That manufacturers raw material will be taxed when in fact they aren't? That retailers won't be reimbursed for collecrion when they are? Kinda like passing judgement on whether a person is guilty of a crime or not based on one or two news articles that contain few facts.....
That's just it. I have read both proposals, pro and con and both left me wanting. Having been very active in California's Proposition 13 initiative in the late 70's, I am no newcomer to tax issues. The problem with a detailed reply is that the schemes presented do not warrant the repetition of that already said elsewhere. You don't need me to tell you what's wrong with the FT or NRST. There are plenty of web sites that have that info and opinion.
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.