Sales of Boortz book spike as interest in fair tax increases

Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 8-20-2005 | Matt Kempner

[phil_will1]

"Now that's just plain funny. Congress screws us seven ways to Sunday in a myriad of different ways, and the American People just don't give a damn. Gatekeepers? There isn't even a gate."

“I discussed the importance of abolishing the income tax because of its tendency to form a habit of servility in the souls of a people that accept it. Servility of soul is bad not only in itself, it is also an open door through which will soon walk the abuses of ambitious government power. Leaders who find themselves with governmental power over a servile people will be quick to conclude that such a people exist to serve them.”
Alan Keyes “The Power of the Purse”, WorldNet Daily, August 27,1999

Your victim's mentality is your problem, Wolfie, not mine.

[Trajan88]

Boortz... Texas A&M Aggie Former Student... Gig 'Em!

Trajan88; TAMU Class of '88; Law Hall (may it R.I.P.) Ramp 9 Mule; f.u.p.!

[pigdog]

The FairTax bill (HR25) repeals both the income tax AND payroll taxes early in the bill so there will certainly not be both together.

Here, though, is a link to comparative features of different tax systems (note that there are 2 pages):

http://fairtaxvolunteer.org/pdf/Comparison_Chart.pdf

[pigdog]

You seem to be intentionally overlooking the substantial downsides to the any income-based tax in supporting some idea of a flat tax ... which flavor of flat tax do yu support?

[GSlob]

"which flavor of flat tax do you support?"
Honey vanilla, please - no tax preferenced items to originate from the time of transition, and allowing a sunset period for the grandfathering and expiration of all pre-existing tax-advantaged items. 15-18% rate could probably do, but since the existing (not future) residential mortgage contracts would have to be grandfathered, initially it might have to be 20-22% to compensate for it.

[phil_will1]

"Honey vanilla, please - no tax preferenced items to originate from the time of transition, and allowing a sunset period for the grandfathering and expiration of all pre-existing tax-advantaged items. 15-18% rate could probably do, but since the existing (not future) residential mortgage contracts would have to be grandfathered, initially it might have to be 20-22% to compensate for it."

Sounds like a flat tax proposal which hasn't been developed or entered in to congress yet.

[Wolfie]

You wanna live in a fairy tale world, knock yourself out. The reality of the way Congress works will take over every time.

[photodawg]

Got it. You actually have no argument with the bill itself; you've just already given up on the whole "of, by, for the people" thing. Government's won.

_________________________________________________________


No, you still don't "have it!" Every example you've listed with one exception, involves spending revenue, not collecting it. This backs up my point. Spending is something we do quite well. Taxing people is something we do even better. If, in our desire to make a better tax structure, we give the foxes an even better chance at the chickens, we won't accomplish what we set out to do. They will use the bill to their advantage to increase taxes. That's what they do best, and this will just give them some new smoke and mirrors to help them take proportionally more from taxpayers. This is what I have seen happen numerous times on all government levels.
I taught public school in CT for 32 years. When we needed new teachers back in early 80s we passed an enhancement act to raise salaries to 35k for beginning teachers. Since our contract was legally binding on the state, the back end of the salary schedule also had to be raised (to 60k). The salary schedule more than doubled in cost, and no new teachers could be hired because all the old ones had to stay extra years to get the salary increases to double their retirement incomes. The state went broke trying to pay the salaries, and their was absolutely no improvement in the educational product. The only thing that changed at school was the size of the cars in the teachers parking lot! The state of CT then enacted an income tax to pay the shortfall. They did so by "reducing" not eliminating the highest in the nation sales tax. do you see what I mean? The politicians used the teacher salary issue ( the children, the classroom teachers, the importance of education) as the smoke screen to get the income tax past the voters. These guys are good! Most are lawyers, and use the system.
Am I for tax reform? Absolutely. But reform must be to the existing system, not new plans that allow these people to take further advantage of us as will doubtless happen with the fair tax. Our present system makes everyone that pays tax unhappy. this probably means its working.
Again, I am not negative, defeated, resigned, or in any other way disheartened. In fact since 911 I have become more positive than ever that we are the greatest country ever on the face of this earth, with the greatest 20% of can do people in history (smile), and we have much to be thankful for.

[Conservative Goddess]

But any system of income taxation is not eligible for border adjustment. That is a HUGE ball and chain for onshore manufacturing concerns....and largely the reason they went offshore. We MUST abandon income systems of taxation. Please see: http://www.inquit.com/461/wto-and-tax-subsidies

[GSlob]

Nonsense. Offshoring has very little to do with taxes or border adjustments, and much more to do with the labor costs - why else is it happening to the places like China, and not to Luxembourg or tax heavens like say, Monaco?

[pigdog]

Read the bill and then come back and let's talk.

You seem to have little grasp of what it does and how it operates.

[phil_will1]

"Our present system makes everyone that pays tax unhappy. this probably means its working."


"It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption, that they contain in their own nature a security against excess. They prescribe their own limit; which cannot be exceeded without defeating the end proposed, that is, an extension of the revenue. When applied to this object, the saying is as just as it is witty, that, 'in political arithmetic, two and two do not always make four.' If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds. This forms a complete barrier against any material oppression of the citizens by taxes of this class, and is itself a natural limitation of the power of imposing them."
Alexander Hamilton in Federalist #21

Your argument above is a weak one vs a vs the FairTax in the sense that the FairTax's much greater visibility would lead to much more resistence to the rate of taxation than the current one does, since so much of the current system's tax burden is hidden from the taxpayers who pay it.

[photodawg]

If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded;
__________________________________________________________


This argument by Hamilton for a "consumption" tax presupposes a free market and goods predominantly produced in the country imposing the tax. If we apply the example to gasoline we see the reverse can also be true. If the price of gasoline, due to disruption of supply, becomes too high, forcing people to consume less, then we collect less tax. On universally necessary commodities like gasoline, this shortfall would have a severe impact on tax revenue. The government, and to some degree the economic system, needs a more stable revenue stream than this tax would provide in order to be administered effectively. Income is less directly affected by the marketplace ups and downs, and thus is a more stable revenue source.

[pigdog]

Longer term sutdies by different economists show that consumption is more stable a revenue source than is income.

Your reasoning is not correct since in any event if consumption is affected as you suppose, then also the income that derives from that will take a huge hit also. With consumption it is possible for people to use savings or borrowing if necessary to continue their consumption at whatever their level might be.

[phil_will1]

"Income is less directly affected by the marketplace ups and downs, and thus is a more stable revenue source."

That is factually incorrect. Historical trends reveal that consumption is a more stable revenue base than taxable income.

[phil_will1]

Boortz is on the air this morning saying that the fire marshalls kept out late comers to the book signing last night in Dayton, OH. He said that he signed about 800 books.

I wish they could extend the book signing tour into September. The exposure that this is giving the FairTax is enormous.

[Conservative Goddess]

Offshoring is happening all over the world and taxation is an undeniable part of it. The placement of the operation is dependent on several factors, including labor costs, basic infrastructure like roads and utilities, increased inventory turn time due to transportation lags, etc. Taxation is likewise and undeniable factor and we've shot ourselves in the foot, but we now wonder why we limp into the world market.

http://www.idaireland.com/home/index.aspx?id=659

[Conservative Goddess]

Please also see: http://www.washingtontimes.com/commentary/20041130-084445-1131r.htm