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

Skip to comments.

Tax Reform Panel Picks Apart FairTax Proposal
Tax Analyists ^ | 5/12/2005

Posted on 05/12/2005 7:46:54 PM PDT by Your Nightmare

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,261-1,2801,281-1,3001,301-1,320 ... 1,481-1,490 next last
To: Your Nightmare

Certainly you should know asinine. The CRS (which states it disclaims the study you present, BTW) is tax supported and provides a large gravy train for defunct economists that cannot make it outside of the Beltway. The group indeed does have a bias whether you admit it or not.

In any event, the analysis they present was performed by the JCT which certainly has a bias for the status quo (as you do - representations to the contrary notwithstanding). In addition, some of the models involved were authored or co-authored by two of those presenting the paper making the "analysis" you think is so meaningful. Right - they are completely unbiased!!

This merely shows how well entrenched the SQL crowd is inside the Beltway. And you can't even admit this. But enough of your deflection efforts that are meaningless attempts to sidetrack the FairTax.

Let's get back to your plan to push your fantasy Nightmare VAT (or today is it the Nightmare Flat) tax. Point us to your bill in Congress so we may learn of the details of the bill.


1,281 posted on 05/25/2005 8:38:57 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1276 | View Replies]

To: Principled
2) 20/80 or 25% this is the tax exclusive method ie the amount of tax is not included in the number you're dividing (80 in this case).

So where is the other 75%?

1,282 posted on 05/25/2005 8:43:56 AM PDT by lewislynn ( Is calling for energy independence a "protectionist" act?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1277 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
You're dumber than I thought. You don't understand the whole can be with the tax paid or without it.

You don't even understand this well enough to ask a question that makes sense.

There are only about 5 posters even viewing this thread anymore - too bad. The inclusive/exclusive has been well explained several times. You really must be too dumb to get it. Did you graduate public school?

1,283 posted on 05/25/2005 8:44:52 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1280 | View Replies]

To: pigdog
Am I talking to a wall here, or what???

No only in circles with no examples.

1,284 posted on 05/25/2005 8:46:15 AM PDT by lewislynn ( Is calling for energy independence a "protectionist" act?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1279 | View Replies]

To: pigdog
I guess reason isn't an option with you. Oh well...

Where is that ignore button...
1,285 posted on 05/25/2005 8:46:19 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1281 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn

20/80 or 25% this is the tax exclusive method ie the amount of tax is not included in the number you're dividing (80 in this case).

So where is the other 75%?




that's where you're stuck, isn't it?!
The answer to your question is the crux of your problem.
Try asking yourself the SAME question using inclusive numbers. ANd remember the definition of inclusive and exclusive. Get some help if you need it.


1,286 posted on 05/25/2005 8:48:06 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1282 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare

Reason is - yes - but you haven't offered any, but merely items that are obviously biased on any of several counts.

Your SQL outlook is overcoming reality and I see you are now ducking your own (theoretical) tax system. No surprise.


1,287 posted on 05/25/2005 8:50:00 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1285 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn

"Fairtax is just as simple as State Sales taxes.
Can you actually give an example?"

Pennsylvania's sales tax is far from simple, much simpler than the IR code, but not simple.


1,288 posted on 05/25/2005 8:50:25 AM PDT by Daveinyork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Principled
You don't even understand this well enough to ask a question that makes sense.

-----

20/80 or 25%

You lie, math doesn't. Just answer the simple math question to YOUR equation..

Where is the other 75% to YOUR equation?

1,289 posted on 05/25/2005 8:52:19 AM PDT by lewislynn ( Is calling for energy independence a "protectionist" act?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1283 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
Where is the other 75% to YOUR equation?

Okay first, it's not an equation.

Second, where is the other 75% of what?

Again, you don't even know what to ask. How old are you anyway?

1,290 posted on 05/25/2005 9:10:10 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1289 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
Percent is a ratio that compares any number to 100. In the case of 20/80, that is equivalent to 25/100 hence 25 percent.

I'm not sure you know how to find equivalent fractions (in fact I'm fairly certain you do not!), but get some help if you need it.

1,291 posted on 05/25/2005 9:13:18 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1289 | View Replies]

To: pigdog
Reason is - yes - but you haven't offered any, but merely items that are obviously biased on any of several counts.
Quote the paper where you see bias. You do know how to cut and paste, don't you? If not, ask AG.
1,292 posted on 05/25/2005 9:13:50 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1287 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare

No need to cut and paste; the bias lies in the authors themselves as I have said (as well as the groups they work for). Shame you can't see it - but no surprise since you are one of the SQL bunch yourself.

I've read the paper and see little of merit in it. It's merely another economic model based upon the assumptions of those doing the modelling which (as pointed out) have a built-in bias. As do you.

Now - were is the bill for your "tax plan" ... and which congressmen back it? Or have you finally discovered it is unsupportable?


1,293 posted on 05/25/2005 9:21:06 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1292 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare
Caught? LOL! Piggy is saying the whole Congressional Research Service (part of the Library of Congress) is biased because they write reports on "government funding" and thus "are dependent on staying on he gravy train of public funding." But he can't point to one substantive piece of evidence that they are biased. Frankly, that's just asinine.

Caught indeed! Asinine is anyone who believes that anything coming for a source such as this is NOT heavily biased toward the current system.

1,294 posted on 05/25/2005 9:31:47 AM PDT by Bigun (IRS sucks @getridof it.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1276 | View Replies]

To: pigdog
Shame you can't see it
Yeah, a real pity I don't see bias everywhere I look. Must be nice to be able to dismiss out of hand anything you don't like by just claiming bias. Must come in real handy (as we have seen).


It's merely another economic model based upon the assumptions of those doing the modelling which (as pointed out) have a built-in bias.
LOL! It's not about an economic model! It's reviewing several models and trying to determine why they act differently. You never read the paper.
1,295 posted on 05/25/2005 9:35:47 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1293 | View Replies]

To: Bigun
Caught indeed! Asinine is anyone who believes that anything coming for a source such as this is NOT heavily biased toward the current system.
Another person who has absolutely no idea what the hell they are talking about. Birds of a feather...
1,296 posted on 05/25/2005 9:36:56 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1294 | View Replies]

To: Bigun
Caught indeed! Asinine is anyone who believes that anything coming for a source such as this is NOT heavily biased toward the current system.
BTW, the tax system could change completely tomorrow and it wouldn't change a thing at the CRS. Not one person would lose their job or have it changed.
1,297 posted on 05/25/2005 9:41:01 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1294 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
Where is the other 75% to YOUR equation?

What 75% are you talking about? The example is crystal clear. Your question makes no sense.

1,298 posted on 05/25/2005 9:43:47 AM PDT by groanup (http://fairtax.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1289 | View Replies]

To: Principled
Second, where is the other 75% of what?

----

20/80 or 25%

I'll play your silly game...25% of what?

1,299 posted on 05/25/2005 10:00:26 AM PDT by lewislynn ( Is calling for energy independence a "protectionist" act?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1290 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare
BTW, the tax system could change completely tomorrow and it wouldn't change a thing at the CRS. Not one person would lose their job or have it changed.

Perhaps that is true and perhaps it is not. I have no way of knowing for sure but since government operations are notorious for not holding its employees accountable for their work product it wouldn't surprise me at all if what you say would not be true.

1,300 posted on 05/25/2005 10:02:56 AM PDT by Bigun (IRS sucks @getridof it.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1297 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,261-1,2801,281-1,3001,301-1,320 ... 1,481-1,490 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