"No, I'd rather keep hammering at the Flat tax proposal with NO Deductions. That's a one track plan that has gathered steam over the years."
What "steam" are you referring to? The flat tax in its various incarnations has been around a lot longer than the FairTax and yet the FairTax has more widespread support. That doesn't even count the fact that the FairTax is a specific proposal while the flat tax is a form of taxation which has various versions, none of whcih seem to have much traction.
Answer me this, please. If the flat tax with no deductions has such traction and popularity, why did the sponsor of the leading flat tax bill in the house (Rep. Burgess) decide a year or so ago to change Mr Armey's original design and make the flat tax an option, which means it does not replace a single word of the 60,000 page mess we have now - not even the despised and feared AMT.
That would not strike most people as a show of confidence in the flat tax as a complete replacement of the current dysfunctional system. What do you know that Rep. Burgess does not?
"Most people of this 83% polling don't realize the road ahead for the parallel path of starting one and eliminating the other. Too much room for Liberal dirty tricks."
Do you have any data to back that up or are you just pontificating? I would bet that most of the 83% know something that has apparently escaped you - which is that while there may be risks associated with converting to another tax system, continuing down the path we are on is hardly a low risk option. In fact, if you look at just the trendline in our balance of trade (to name just one economic problem exacerbated by our current tax system), it would be silly to make the case that we aren't headed for major problems.
That doesn't even count our individual savings rate of almost zero, the spiral of complexity and ever higher compliance costs, and the looming demographic time bomb in SS and Medicare. Sticking with the status quo because of fear of change is definitely short-sighted IMHO.