Posted on 06/10/2005 11:13:37 AM PDT by Always Right
Hey, post that to pigdog and ancient_geezer, they're the ones beating it to death -- while we stand around and watch. LOL!
More probably they figure (as does pittipat) that the number doesn't mean that much to most people. It does, however, to me. I prefer the correct figure but I klnow you guys can't even spell 29.87%.LOL! So when expatpat says 30% he's trying to fool people, but when the AFT says 30% "they just got tired"!
Yes, health care premiums are taxes as is health care itself unless it is covered by a plan that has been taxed.
But again, the cost of those premiums as well as those of the health care providers will be reduced because the hidden cost of government will have been removed.
You also get a prebate.
You also get your full paycheck.
You will have more money and prices will be lower.
You've been told that repeatedly. Why do you always act as that will not be true?
If I can improve my margins by 20%, why give that up to get a 10% increase in volume? I'm beginning to wonder about you.....
Maybe we should argue for a 10% rate. Most of the SQLs would scream like stuck pigs at the lost revenue to their beloved status quo.
Sticks in your craw, don't it???
The formula you presented as being meaningful in relation to the sales tax was one that determined the employee cost as INCOME taxes were changed and showed nothing at all in relation to the FairTax.
You merely were presenting a lie disguised as fact and were caught. Tell us nightie, how the income tax and the FairTax are the same thing and how, since the FairTax base is consumption and not income that a formula dealing with income tax rates is meaningful at all. Hint - It ain't; it's merely a lie.
Thass funnee, nightie. I nailed uyou with 11 lies on the last thread.
Your creditility is zip to most people who have been on a few threads with you.
Ahh I see, so your contention is that business operates without calculating competiton.
So all those businesses will just agree not to change the status quo and just operate at current levels and not try to change their market share and seek an advantage. Correct?
Agreed!
Now you're getting it. It sure beats racing with your competitors to get to the lowest price to see who goes bankrupt first.
If you claim to be sure that the revenue-neutral number is 23.0% and not 23.1%, then you are either BS'ing me or delusional
I don't, I figure the revenue neutral number to be closer to 18-20% tax inclusive not 23%. Based on current federal revenues collected through income, payroll and gift estate taxes as a percent of reported annual national retail sales in the U.S.
Have your class envy always been this rabid?
The more you spend, the more tax you will pay under the FairTax, so that should make you very happy.
Right now, most of those hated 'billionaires and their useless heirs' aren't paying income taxes because they can afford to shelter their income from the tax man. When they spend their money on caviar and Rolls Royces, you will be getting back at them.
You should be on board with this plan just because of your hatred/envy/jealousy or what ever it is that drives you.
expatpat:"Now you're getting it. It sure beats racing with your competitors to get to the lowest price to see who goes bankrupt first.
OK so with your assertion that business operates without regard to competition in mind why not just raise your prices 20% now and forget the NRST? Wouldn't you make more money?
Maybe we should argue for a 10% rate. Most of the SQLs would scream like stuck pigs at the lost revenue to their beloved status quo.
Heck they complain it's not enough at 23% in the opening article, and nearly every other thread I have been on.
You don't figure they would buy into a lower tax rate do you? Far as I can see the tax rate has nothing to do with there opposition, unless they figure government is not taking enough from us already.
You'd prefer a lie like you give, perhaps, nightie???
That one on the right looks a lot like nightie ... hope we're not related!
Sticks in your craw, don't it???You being a complete and total dumba$$? No, I find it kinda funny (and useful - thanks).
The TAX system, not our form (at least as intended) of government. The tax system is immoral. Of course, the perversion of our system (as it now operates) of government is getting pretty immoral also.
Oh, I see - you think it really funny that you lied. You only THINK you got away with it my friend.
People on FR are onto your litle shtick.
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.