... and what size do YOU wear??? High heels, or low???That's funny coming from "I Like to Squeal Like a" PigDog.
Squeal like a pig for us, Piggydog. Come on, squeal. Weeeee!
Posted on 05/12/2005 7:46:54 PM PDT by Your Nightmare
Members of the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform on May 11 expressed concerns over the FairTax national retail sales tax, a plan that has emerged as an alternative with a major grass-roots push.
Panel chair Connie Mack, vice chair John B. Breaux, and other members worried the plan would be difficult to enforce, would be regressive, and would require a high rate in order to take in enough money to fund the government.
Breaux raised concerns that the proposed 23 percent (tax-inclusive) rate would not be sufficient to raise the revenue necessary to fund the government. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that it would take as much as a 57 percent (tax-exclusive) rate to be revenue-neutral. Further, Breaux said he thought exemptions that would be carved out to make the sales tax progressive would also complicate it.
Mack, who raised concerns similar to his fellow panelists', said he was "intrigued" by the plan. "But if it's such a great idea, why haven't other political entities around the world pursued it?" he asked.
Americans for Fair Taxation Executive Director Tom Wright emphasized that the plan emerged after "thorough academic research" and "thorough polling" The strong grass-roots push has resulted in some of the group's 600,000 members appearing at each of the panel's hearings and has inspired a large comment-writing campaign to the panel in support of the plan.
Sales tax advocates were among the 20 witnesses who gathered before the panel for a full day of testimony on tax reform proposals. Although the group has held several other hearings in Washington and around the country, the May 11 meeting was its first hearing on specific reform plans since Bush appointed the panel in January. The panel has been charged with identifying tax reform proposals that are progressive, encourage charitable giving and home purchases, and are revenue-neutral. The proposals are due by July 31.
Among the tax replacement and reform plans presented to the panel were the value added tax, consumption-based tax, and the flat tax, as well as proposals that would use the current income tax as the foundation.
Witnesses generally claimed that theirs was the fairest, simplest, most flexible, most transparent revenue-neutral proposal that would improve economic growth and savings while meeting the president's criteria of encouraging charitable giving and home buying. Witnesses presenting consumption-based plans praised their overhaul as taking millions of low-income taxpayers off the rolls, being easy to transition to on a worldwide basis, and including safeguards to prevent new loopholes that would result in increased complexity down the road.
Tax reform panel members, who agree the current tax system needs to be fixed, grilled witnesses without revealing whether they will ultimately endorse a consumption- or income-based tax or a different mixture of the two.
... and what size do YOU wear??? High heels, or low???
see --- he's at it again ...
Quick, get looey and his arithmetic eridution. This is a biggie ...
Gee, I thought the subject was clear when you showed us your WTF (World Terpsichore Foundation) dancing shoes. Did I somehow miss it?
My exact words were "Any specifics of this report you want to point out as being biased?"She said TaxAnalysts were biased and I asked her if she saw any bias in this report.No, that's not what you asked her.
"more than" means add, speaking of middle school math.Uh, not when you are talking percentages. Twenty-five more than 0 would be 25. But that's not what you said (yet another lie). Twenty-five percent more than 0 would be 0. Ask any seventh-grader.
... and what size do YOU wear??? High heels, or low???That's funny coming from "I Like to Squeal Like a" PigDog.
Hey - no fair!! You got my pikture and didn't even give us yours (your WTF slippers don't count).
Promoting a national sales tax makes business an arm of the government.
What we need is to get the government totally out of the tax collection business.
The best tax would be a tax on the creation of money.
The Federal government would take only 10% of the money needed to run the economy for one year.
This would make the government business friendly, making government pass business friendly laws in order for the income of the government to rise.
This would in effect limit the growth of government to 10% of the economy.
It would also make the government invisible to most Americans...no more reporting to the government how much you made, or having business report how much it sold.
Making the government collect on the amount of money it creates also would get the Federal Reserve Monkey off our backs.
The Federal government would be the only entity that would be allowed to create money...no more Federal Reserve Debt notes.
This is the only real answer to our economic and trade problems.
Having the retailers collect the tax does not make them an "arm" of the government at all and the businesses would be paid to collect the tax under the FairTax. If they WERE an arm of the government they would not be paid for this service - that's the way it is done presently; business collects taxes and is not paid for doing so. In addition, the government places many unfunded mandates upon businesses at present in doing this uncompensated service.
Also, the government hardly needs to tax the creation of money when they can so easily create it untaxed and have the tax results drop into their laps via the income tax. The income tax method benefits their revenues when money is created and offers them the wonderful political plum of controlling much of the citizens' lifestyles via income tax laws.
By the way, what is 25 more than ZERO?!!!! ROTFLMAO!!!!!
Maybee geezer can link that deception of yours - a classic.
he went on for 100 posts arguing that 100-22 = 88 - and based his entire argument on it.
I don't go on 100 posts on any one thing.
How is that different from your hero Ancient Geezer going on about how there's an "exclusive tax rate for income"?
Meaning there's an income tax rate that excludes the income it's supposed to tax...He even showed the numbers. The problem was he couldn't figure out how to exclude the income from the tax to make it work...more than once...go figure.
BTW, there's only one way anyone could know I once used different screen names ....I disclosed it.
Also, the government hardly needs to tax the creation of money when they can so easily create it untaxed and have the tax results drop into their laps via the income tax. The income tax method benefits their revenues when money is created and offers them the wonderful political plum of controlling much of the citizens' lifestyles via income tax laws.Uh huh. And this is the same government you expect will scrap all that opportunity in favor of a nst?
And if this same government DOES scrap all of that opportunity in favor of your nst, I should be very worried why.
Heck, prrincy, thass nuthin' - in fact almost accurate for him.
A few years ago looey (or one of his other four screennames ... I forget which) made up a "numbers" problem and "solved" it for us to show how rong we all were.
Problem was that his "solution" made an error of 400%. I'm just thankful he's not in the IRS. Come to think of it, maybe he is ...
You forgot to take your medication today I think. You're babbling nonsense again.
When the FairTax law passes (and it will) the government will certainly scrap that "opportunity" since the FairTax will be the law, looey.
I thought you knew that.
Semantics, here, looey ... actually your were caught doing it, accused of it, and finally admitted it.
"Disclosed" sort of implies you came up with the notion out of the blue - you didn't.
It Makes them tax collectors weather they are paid for it or not.
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.