The problem with your argument is that it encourages social engineering based on government's idea of what is good for society. I'd rather let 200 million Americans decide what's good for themselves than to let some anonymous bureaucrats of any quantity decide those things for me.
You're right. I agree with people making decisions for themselves, etc., just as you say. But, I also believe a society, any society, should have the right to create the rules they want to live with and the obligation to provide for the general welfare of that society if that's what they want.
I'm still looking at the Fair Tax with an open mind, but with questions. I support Milton Friedman and Steve Forbes idea of a flat tax, or flatter tax than we have now. I may also find out I like the Fair Tax, but I'm not there yet. I vote against every tax increase and I firmly believe there is way too much money for government overall, which is partly responsible for the corruption in government. If these guys didn't have all that money, they wouldn't be attracting lobbyists like flies to a cow patty.
I also think taxes play a part in buying decisions for some products, such as where someone buys something and when to make the purchase. Taxes have been used for social engineering for years, and the results have not always been bad. For example, we would not have as much of the low income housing we have today were it not for the tax breaks provided to investors to build them. Or, one reason people will buy storm windows and insulation is because of tax savings.
Regardless, I'm still learning about it. Thanks for the response.