Posted on 04/04/2006 2:17:28 PM PDT by Eaglewatcher
Oh yes, Nightie - such a carefully-done study ... one that cannot even get the name of the FairTax sponsor correct and throughout uses the Bill Gale'esque inflated tax rate to produce the desired Chicken Little effect.
While all the time ignoring the amount the states now pay since they are taxed now by the federal government just as the federal government taxes itself. The "study" isn't meaningful at all but I'm sure you'll like it. Your tactic has always been (and still is) to throw up as much dust into the air as possible hoping that some of it blinds those who look no further for information.
When you see that's not succeeding, you then attempt to drag the thread off topic into some never-ending alleyway that is meaningless.
The primary issue to most people is freedom, friend. Your scare tactics are not working.
Where were those 20 words or less that was to illustrate your point (if you have one)?
It's naughty of you to disabuse Nightie of his favorite Chicken Little pontifications. He thinks people are stupid enough for his "stuff" to scare their socks off.
If you keep that up, he may bust a blood vessel - or say something bad at you.
Wrong-o, Nightie. the buxx come from the same place as at present - tax revenue. And it DOES matter if they do it currently - can you not read??? (Obviously not).
Yet again you spam a thread with post that have no value.
Labor costs are one of those costs. An $80,000 annual salary costs the producer 80k plus fica. Even though the worker only sees 60k, the full 80k plus fica is a cost that must be covered and hence is in prices.
Help me understand what you don't agree with here.
And why, exactly did you add pension and SS to the scenarioThat's what Kellis does. skew the numbers to make it appear favorable to the fairtax.
Haven't you noticed? If this, then that...If that, then this. Like when he throws in the 3/4 of states payroll is educator's and the educator's wages salaries and benefits aren't subject to the new excise tax...Well, yes they are, only tuiton isn't subject to the Fairtax, there's nothing about "educator's" wages, salaries and benefits being exempt.
But what does that matter when your only argument is - if this, then that, if that, then this and neither this or that is factual but by doing this, then that he keeps moving the goal posts?
But not income tax, that was your distraction.
How dense are you?
You attack the FT for being a step towards socialism/communism.
The income tax IS communism.
Yet you apparently want to keep the income tax.
More than enough has been said here for you to find 20 words on which you can formulate a nit picking distraction.
You seem to be wrong about nearly everything.
May of the arguments they present don't stand up to common sense let alone any sort of intensive analysis - like "the government taxing itself" conundrum since that's already being done.Your ignorance on taxes is astounding.
Just as you are wrong about taxpayers are the tax base, you're also wrong about the withholding of employee's wages to the advantage of the employer (government) is at the same time taxing the employer (government).
The main thing that I was wrong about was thinking that you might have had some common sense and the ability and willingness to actually discuss the subject. Instead you prefer cryptic messages, gamesm and gibberish.
Goodbye.
I don't understand why you don't get that costs experienced go into the cost of the good or service sold. Labor costs are one of those costs. An $80,000 annual salary costs the producer 80k plus fica. Even though the worker only sees 60k, the full 80k plus fica is a cost that must be covered and hence is in prices.Would you like to walk through how the law of supply and demand determines the market price? You will see that, in a competitive market, costs determine whether a business can survive, but not the price of what they sell.
I don't understand why you don't get that costs experienced go into the cost of the good or service sold.You must work for the government, that's just ass backwards thinking. The price you can get minus hard costs to produce determines what you can pay/earn, not the other way around. You don't determine how much you're going to earn or how much to pay employee's before you know what you can get for your product/service.Labor costs are one of those costs. An $80,000 annual salary costs the producer 80k plus fica. Even though the worker only sees 60k, the full 80k plus fica is a cost that must be covered and hence is in prices.
Help me understand what you don't agree with here.
Gasoline prices have increased 50% in the last couple of years, is it because everyone at the gas station got a 50% raise?...Oh wait I know, it's because of their "tax costs".
It's not rocket science.
Look, you are a propagandist with a job to sell some tax scheme. You are not even going to accept commonsense that conflicts with your script. You are not here to discuss, you are here to promote and, it seems, failing that, to ridicule. I'v said what I wanted, you keep repeating the script, it's done for now.
LOL
It's too late for you to quit now. You've already been fired.
Getting fired is, perhaps, something you need to worry about considering the job you are doing is harming your cause more than helping.
"Numbers skewing" is Nightie's pasttime - but you probably haven't noticed that.
Sorry, eskie, you'll have to do your own searching for 20 words of explanation. everyone's tired of guessing what you intend the gibberish to mean.
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.