Posted on 06/10/2005 11:13:37 AM PDT by Always Right
I'm not, nor is anyone else. But everyone else sees that the $23,000 does not get reported in either system. That doesn't change.
What does change is that the drug dealer begins paying his full share of taxes under the nrst. Under the income tax, he only pays a portion of his share- the part embedded in prices.
You're the only one who is so blind not to see this.
The $23,000 goes unreported in either system, duh. That's one of the reasons it's called an illegal transaction.
Beyond that, you have a fundmental misunderstanding about who pays the nrst. It is not business, it is the consumer. You're so stuck in the mindset of income taxes that a myopia blinds you to things others see as obvious (big surpirse).
Open your eyes.
But under the nrst, drug dealers will pay their full share - so us legal folks don't have to pay for them anymore.
An old adage is raise taxes on what you wish to discourage, lower taxes on what you wish to encourage. Therefore, I propose government employees pay all taxes.
In fact, you have no basis for the statement at all since it is just as likely as not that the John & drug buyer paid little or no in the way of income taxes.You have no basis for that statement. Unless these people are using counterfeit money, all money in the underground market can be traced to legitimate sources.
But your analysis assumes ALL taxes are embedded in the final costs of goods and services, so the drug dealer is in fact paying the same under either system. You guys talk in circles and deny the basic truth.
The consumer pays in the income tax system too, it is just the retailer, distribution people, manufacturer and their employees who actually remit the tax under the income tax. It is no different except in the sales tax, it is only the retailer who remits the lump sum of all the taxes.
But the tables are turned with the NRST. The states will be remitting grossly more than they will ever receive.What's more likely to happen is some states will be more lax in collecting the NRST than others and will start a whisper campaign. "Move your business to our state. We don't do NRST audits very frequently." What does the state care if the NRST is collected? 0.25%?
The tax base for both systems is the entire legal economy. A $1000 purchase under the sales tax will yeild a similar amount of tax as a $1000 purchase under the income tax. If your system is tax neutral, you really can't argue with that. The only way to capture the illegal economy is to somehow make it part of the legal economy, which a sales tax does not do. I understand this point completely. It is not me who needs to open his eyes.
So now you agree that prices will remain stable under the nrst - that's a start.
Here's the difference you don't get: under the income tax, other people must pay a portion of the drug dealer's taxes because he only pays a portion of his taxes under the income tax... he pays no income tax, he pays no FICA... so we have to cover it for him.
But under the nrst, the drug dealer pays his FULL share of tax.
Under the income tax, he pays only a portion of his taxes.
Under the nrst, he pays all his taxes.
Can you not see that we all no longer have to pay for the drug dealer's taxes???
This is not relevant. It may be the same total collection, but I no longer have to subsidize he drug dealer under the nrst - he will begin paying 100% of his taxes! sheesh!
You've been into the kool-aid too heavy. There is no argument, no matter how stupid, that you'll not try in order to keep the marxist income tax in place.
Open your eyes, stop selling income tax snake oil. You income tax fanatics are not logical.
I would if employees took a pay cut, but since employees pocket the money it is impossible for prices to remian stable. There will be an immediate 15-20% inflation under the NRST.
This is not relevant.
It is the only thing that is relevant. It is the whole point that you miss and fail to acknowledge that it is a complete wash.
Whether it's a wash is not relevant. What IS important is that of the total collected, the drug dealer now pays his share. Currently, he doesn't. Currently, his only pays a portion of his taxes.
You are missing the point. It is not that the total collected stays the same or not. It is that under the income tax, drug dealer doesn't pay all his taxes, we have to pay some of his taxes for him. But under the nrst, the drug dealer pays ALL his taxes, so we no longer have to pay any of his taxes... becuase he pays ALL HIS TAXES under the nrst.
Under the income tax, the drug dealer only pays a portion of his taxes.
Under the nrst, the drug dealer pays all his taxes - so we will no longer need to have a higher rate on the rest of us in order to make up for the drug dealer's taxes that aren't paid under the income tax.
As usual, your focus is so tight on th eincome tax, that you miss the point and look dumb.
I'll match my level of experience running a business with yours, any day, since it's clear that yours is extremely limited. What is your level of business experience that allows you to pontificate on the way business works?
So the IT is going to kill us, huh? I don't like it either, but that claim is a sign that your medication isn't working.
I don't think so, but it is already killing our economy. It's killing our export industry.
Analogy is not too tough. In no way is the income tax a simple tooth ache - it is a terminal illness. Are you going to spend bandwidth minimizing the deadly effects of the income tax on our economy?
That's not true, it is mostly the NRST worshipers who don't see the point. Besides, I really don't care who agrees with me, because I am absolutely correct on this.
Whether it's a wash is not relevant.
That's the whole point, so how can it not be relevant.
What IS important is that of the total collected, the drug dealer now pays his share.
He illegally does not remit the 23% of his gross sales, so I can't see how any rationale person can claim he pays his share. Who share is he pocketing then? No matter how you view it, he is liable to remit that tax and he does not.
Currently, he doesn't. Currently, his only pays a portion of his taxes.
He pays zero income tax on the money he receives from drug sales, just like he will pay zero sales tax on the drug sales. The amount is roughly the same.
But under the nrst, the drug dealer pays ALL his taxes, so we no longer have to pay any of his taxes... becuase he pays ALL HIS TAXES under the nrst.
Except the 23% of his gross which you seem in denial about. When the drug dealer finally makes legal purchases, he will pay the embedded taxes which will roughly be the same as the 23% sales tax. Or do you change your assumptions for different scenarios? That is very convenient of you, but very typical.
That's not the point everyone else is talking about. It should be clear that the total collected will be the same - it's revenue neutral, remember?
The point is that the share of taxes paid by drug dealers is small under the income tax compared to the share that would be collected under the nrst.
This is because under our income tax, drug dealers only pay a portion of their tax burden - the part embedded in taxes.
But under the nrst, the drug dealer pays 100% of his taxes.
Under the income tax, the dealer only pays a portion of his taxes, so the rest of us have to pay more in order to collect required revenue.
Under the nrst, the dealer pays ALL of his taxes, so the rest of us don't have to pay his share anymore to collect required revenues.
You are the only one focused on total collected - the rest of us know the nrst is revenue neutral and will collect the same amount of revenue. But unde our income tax, drug dealers escape paying much of their taxes. Under the nrst, they pay all their taxes.
Geez.
Are you trying to tell us that drug dealers will increase their price in order to pay the tax?!!! LOL!!!!
Besides, in a competitive industry, unnecessary costs are eliminated. If that were true, they'd increase their prices by x% today. But they don't.
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.