Posted on 05/11/2006 5:46:17 PM PDT by Man50D
FairTax Rally and a special invitation to you
You are invited as special guests and participants to the Neal Boortz FairTax Rally to be held May 24th at the Gwinnett Convention Center outside Atlanta. Not only will this rally feature Congressman John Linder, WSB talk show host Neal Boortz, and FOX News star and conservative commentator Sean Hannity, but also FairTax.org leaders will be on hand, as well as FairTax activist and leader Herman Cain.
The goal of this rally, which will be broadcast nationally on Sean Hannity's FOX program, “Hannity & Colmes,” is to "kick up" the heat on national leaders to get the FairTax legislation moving. Join us for the this free rally and enjoy history in the making with fellow FairTaxers.
Date: Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Start time: 7:30 p.m.
Who: Neal Boortz
What: Free FairTax Rally
Where: Gwinnett Convention Center 6400 Sugarloaf Parkway Duluth, Georgia 30097
(800) 224-6422
Directions to Gwinnett Center: http://www.gwinnettcenter.com/pages/header/h_maps.html
Why: Neal Boortz is sick and tired of the IRS! He wants the IRS abolished and replaced with the FairTax!
Joining Neal Boortz at the rally:
Sean Hannity
Georgia Congressman John Linder
Herman Cain
FairTax.org leaders Consumer advocate Clark Howard Special musical guests Banks & Shane
There is no charge for this event and tickets are not required.
Please R.S.V.P. for your chance at front row seats to http://bigwinner.cxri.net/Contest.asp?r=10004&s=10732.
Visit Americans For Fair Taxation, www.FairTax.org, to find out more about the FairTax.
A.G.
We are discussing reality and you are discussing FairTax fantasy land. The land of make-believe. You need to grow up and come back to the real world. It's really not so bad here, and our economy is humming along nicely.
As far as I can see, past performance and current performance, as well as the concerns raised by the folks in the threads all attesting to the absolute rejection of retail sales taxes with income taxes is plenty of proof of my position.
What I find lacking is any evidence whatsoever supporting the idea for any political support for federal sales tax along with income taxes coming from any quarter.
Lacking evidence on one side, in fact quite the contrary in nearly universally expressed opinion against both tax systems in place as the federal level demonstrates the future viability of expecting the same to continue for the foreseeable future. Especially as such has been the clear case from many decades now with ample oppertunities and proposals laid out that could have led to such.
Sorry your assertions are belied by even your own statements espousing the concern against such a tax system. A concern that is quite evident throughout the electorate.
The red herring here is your obvious one of trying to introduce a potential that has no demonstrable political viability at all, and a clear case against such in the attitudes of the electorate.
The situation as it exists without the combination of both taxes is a self evident one to any who care to even take the most casual of looks at the political climate in regards federal sales taxes with income taxes. With the electorate is solidly against it at all levels, it is political suicide for any politician to even begin to suggest such.
It's really not so bad here, and our economy is humming along nicely.
Indeed.
"A hand from Washington will be stretched out and placed upon every man's business; the eye of the federal inspector will be in every man's counting house....The law will of necessity have inquisical features, it will provide penalties, it will create complicated machinery. Under it men will be hauled into courts distant from their homes. Heavy fines imposed by distant and unfamiliar tribunals will constantly menace the tax payer. An army of federal inspectors, spies, and detectives will descend upon the state."
-- Virginian House Speaker Richard E. Byrd, 1910, predicting the consequences of an income tax.
| 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 accepts 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. |
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. "
--- Samuel Adams
Here's a thought. Since it has been about a month since I first asked you to give us all your idea of what should be done to reform the tax code, why don't you take a minute to do that? After all, you've had a month and you surely have come up with something by now.
All I have heard since my initial inquiry is how vile the fair taxers are. I have heard nothing constructive from you. In fact I don't think you have ever posted anything constructive, just abasement of the fair taxers. It is a typical SQL argument. But you keep coming back and coming back with your simplistic playground idioms. Why don't you pitch in with at least two or three of your compadres and post something sensical?
Credentials? What are yours? What are you talking about? This is an opinion board. Opinions are backed up by links and facts. That is what the fair taxers do. What do you do? Nothing but childish name calling. Credentials???? Where did this guy come from?
There is NO federal past performance to support your assertion, and the state past performance absolutely refutes it.
Cult obsessions are no substitute for historical facts.
I would continue A.G. but I think the above is sufficient ammunition to expose the Neal Boortz propaganda concerning his version of tax reform.
A.G. responds:
And what exposure is that? seeing as the FairTax legislation has never been claimed to be anything other than a retail sales tax collected by anyone, individual or corporate, engaged in a retail business selling new goods and services to the consumer rather than other businesses.
But don't let facts get in the way of your conspiracy fantasies
Buy the way Neal Boortz had nothing to do with the authoring or writing and creation of the FairTax legislation, so it is hardly his version of tax reform.
ANSWER
Conspiracy fantasies.? You’re funny A.G. But let’s get to some of the facts!
With regard to the Neal Boortz propaganda machine, in article titled ANSWERING A FAIR TAX QUESTION Neal Boortz wrote:
It doesn't matter that paying taxes will be voluntary under the Fair Tax plan. It doesn't matter that nobody pays the retail sales tax on the basic necessities of life.
But the truth is, all consumers pay the tax on the basic necessities of life under the so called fair tax, and, the authors of the tax plan concoct what they call a family consumption allowance”, a monthly check offered to each American household, which is intended to be earmarked by each consumer to offset taxes paid on the basic necessities of life.
In essence, the so called fair tax rations tax-free basic necessities of life, and rations them by the size of the family consumption allowance which would create a new massive voting constituency, dependant upon government for a monthly government check.
Now, with regard to John Linder, the primary sponsor of your beloved legislation in Congress, let us review his clever wording in promoting the socialist friendly, big government friendly H.R. 25 proposal.
Representative John Linder says:
I am the primary sponsor of the FairTax, legislation that will repeal all corporate and individual income taxes, payroll taxes, self-employment taxes, capital gains taxes, estate taxes and gift taxes - and replace it with a revenue-neutral personal consumption tax.
But after reading the language of H.R. 25 it becomes quite obvious the above statement is weasel wording at its best! The truth is, there is no attempt to repeal or prevent Congress from laying and collecting a wide variety of excise taxes, as upheld in FLINT v. STONE TRACY CO., 220 U.S. 107 (1911) which will still allow Congress to lay and collect taxes calculated from gains, profits, salaries and other “income”.
Under the language of H.R. 25, the tax mentioned in the FLINT CASE remains untouched and is a loophole cleverly left which allows Congress, in keeping within the language of H.R. 25, to impose an excise tax upon Corporations, certain privileged occupations, individuals and events, and then calculate the amount of tax to be paid from profits, gains, salaries and other income! So, in spite of all the talk about repealing various sections of the IRS Code and closing it down as portrayed on the cover of the Fair Tax Book, and suggested by Linder, the same type of misery now suffered under income taxation, the Internal Revenue Service and the IRS Code, as applied to taxes calculated from income, would remain very much alive under H.R. 25 by a subtle loophole left by the architects of the proposal!
Instead of being so obstinate A.G., why don’t you work to correct the obvious defects in H.R. 25?
Regards,
JWK___ a proud supporter of our founding father’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN
Cult obsessions are no substitute for historical facts.
Indeed, the historical fact is federal income taxes and state income taxes have preceeded retail sales taxes even at the state level.
The fact is that, there is no protection against the institution of retail sales taxes with income taxes except thost that are imposed by the electorate.
The fact is that the electorate does not support retail sales taxes with income taxes at the federal level, nor have they ever.
The demonstrable fact is that we do not have a federal retail sales tax along with federal income tax inspite of what has occured at state level.
The fact of the current electorate attitude on the behalf of both liberals and conservatives against the imposition of federal retail sales taxes in conjunction with a federal income tax system is undeniable and self evident upon inspection of the demonstrated statements of both liberal and conservative politicians as well as the electorate as regards federal retail sales taxes.
The only cult obsession here is that associated with the idea that the federal income/payroll tax system not be done away with and a federal retail sales tax be implemented in its place. For that obsession exists inspite of all evidence to the contrary that makes it clear that both systems in place together is political suicide for any who should suggest such.
I find it indeed interesting that there is such a clear support for maintaining the progressive income tax system in place by folks pretending to the applation of conservative in view of the real nature of that progressive income tax system as a tax on the rich; The 2nd plank of the Manifesto of the Communist Party, published in 1848. We should never forget nor overlook the philosophical underpinnings of that choice:
"The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state ... . Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property ... . These measures will, of course, be different in different countries. Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in he hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. "
It would seem that the socialists and progressives have done their works well.
a free people that pays slave taxes to its government is willingly training itself for bondage.
---Alan Keyes 1999
Which has nothing to do with your false assertion. Lame.
In the case of the FairTax I expect the income tax would be reintroduced as an emergency tax once the bulk of the economy went underground or disappeared into the "used" market, and the income tax would only be on Rich people who earned more than say $75,000 per year, say 20% tax, they won't miss it, they're rich anyway. No strawmen over here.
Exactly so!
With the loophole left under H.R. 25 which allows Congress to continue to lay excise taxes and calculate the amount of tax to be paid from “income”, why wouldn’t our socialist friendly, big government friendly Congress enact, say a small tax upon those wealthy evil corporations and scoundrels, who make millions of dollars a year and bleed the poor working people, such as was alleged about Leona Helmsley who they sent to jail for an alleged tax fraud, but who actually contributed into the common treasury more in taxes than any twenty average working people in New York?
Regards, JWK___ a proud supporter of our founding father’s ORIGINAL TAX REFORM PLAN
"To lay with one hand the power of the government on the property of the citizen and with the other to bestow upon favored individuals, to aid private enterprises and build up private fortunes is none the less a robbery because it is done under forms of law and called taxation."___Savings and Loan Assc. v. Topeka,(1875).
You keep repeating the Tax Panel's nonsense, Johnicakes, as well as your repetitious posting of drivel about your tax plan that failed in the past and was replaced by the first income tax.
You think that is some sort of recommendation for sticking it to the country again??? Smart, indeed. You'd do better to stick with your promoting income tax evasion schemes that you and your cohort were doing previously.
Several of us have been through all this with you before and you merely keep pushing the same lies.
You also keep repeating the same lies about the prebate being an entitlement - it isn't - and "costing" the government many gazillions of dokkard - it doesn't - and creating a "whole newmassive voting constituency, dependant upon government for a monthly government check+ - that's a lie also.
In short Johnnicakes you seem more than happy to lie about all aspects of the FairTax and you've shown that you haven't even read the bill to boot. In addition, your proposed 32-word clunkeer doesn't do what you claim it would do in any event and certainly does not repeal the portions of the Constitution that would have to be repealed for it to be effective.
In fact, it wouldn't help the economy at all, but destroy it - but of course that's your plan and these Status Quo Lovers are too dumb to realize they're being swallowed whole by an artifact of the Tax Protester movement.
Instead of being so obstinate A.G., why don’t you work to correct the obvious defects in H.R. 25?
HR25 is not a constitutional amendment nor is it intended to be, it is the legislation necessary to remove a major impediment to the ultimate prohibition of taxation of incomes by constitutional amendment.
One step at a time, a viable federal retail sales tax replacing the income tax is step one to backing away from the socialist underpinnings of government we have today by obsoleting the need for income taxes using much the same kind of tactical plan laid out by Ludwig von Mises to pull socialist Austria back from its WWII socialist bent.
Ludwig von Mises as Policy Analyst: Monetary Reform, Fiscal Policy, and Foreign Exchange Controls by Richard M. Ebeling
Heritage Lecture #754http://www.heritage.org/Research/PoliticalPhilosophy/hl754.cfm#pgfId-1023417
"Austria, Mises said, would be a poor country. The destruction of war, the consumption and misuse of capital, the destruction of a large portion of the Austrian entrepreneurial class due to the expelling or murder of so many Jewish businessmen and financiers, and the debilitation of the labor force from death and permanent injury in battle would require Austria to turn its back on its socialist, interventionist, and welfare-statist past. Only economic freedom and hard work could restore Austria from a condition that we might nowadays loosely refer to as "third world" status.
Fiscal policy, therefore, would have to be designed to do everything possible to unleash private sector incentives and opportunities for investment, capital formation, and entrepreneurship. Virtually all taxes, Mises suggested, should be skewed toward consumption and away from production. What type of broadly based consumption taxes? He proposed:
- (1) excise taxes on alcoholic beverages, tobacco, and related tobacco products;
- (2) a sales tax exclusively on the sale of goods and services to the final consumer; there should be no explicit or hidden value added taxes;
- (3) a progressive consumption tax based on housing expenditures, but with an exemption for housing expenditures for those in the lower income brackets;
- (4) a tax on luxury automobiles for private or personal use;
- (5) a tax on lottery winnings;
- (6) a stamp tax on playing cards;
- (7) administrative fees for certain government services, such as issuing patent rights, brand name registrations, determination of weights and measures, and "official stamps" to cover the cost of providing various types of documentation;
- (8) a wage tax paid by employers that was not deducted from the employee's salary to fund existing social insurance programs; and
- (9) a moderate net profits tax on shareholders and limited liability partnerships when annual disbursements exceeded 6 percent of the enterprise's capital assets; retained earnings by the enterprise would be exempt from taxes so as not to discourage capital formation.
Except for the net profits tax and the wage tax for social insurance costs, all income and business earnings would be completely tax-exempt. And a perusal of Mises' proposed list of taxes clearly shows that he thought that, besides the general sales tax, the fiscal burden should primarily be in the form of what nowadays would be classified as "sin taxes" and a narrow selection of "luxury" expenditures. Mises' long recognized advocacy of "laissez-faire" did not mean a hands-off indifference to the path taken by the market economy. What would be produced, where and how goods would be produced, and for which segments of the consuming public would be determined by the pattern of market demand and the profit-driven entrepreneurs. As Mises expressed it in the early 1940s, "If there is any hope for an new [economic] upswing [at the end of the war] it rests with the initiative of individuals. The entrepreneurs will have to rebuild what the governments and politicians have destroyed."
***
It should be mentioned that Mises' apparent concession to the welfare state in his listing among his fiscal suggestions of an employer's tax for social insurance expenditures did not mean his belief in their desirability or necessity. This was clearly an admission that, given the political currents, not everything could be reformed at once. For example, in 1942 Mises was invited to lecture in Mexico for six weeks during which he had the opportunity to studying the economic conditions in the country. The following year, in 1943, he prepared a lengthy monograph for an association of Mexican businessmen on "Mexico's Economic Problems." His recommendation was to not establish social insurance programs in the first place. If part of the cost of such social insurance schemes falls on the shoulders of the employers, it would only succeed in raising the cost of employing workers, with the negative effect of pricing some members of the work force out of the job market. At the same time, such government-mandated insurance policies restricted the freedom of the employee to weigh the opportunity costs of allocating his income in various ways more reflective of his own preferences and that of his family.
You want to fight for a constitutional amendment after that, I'll be glad to support it.
The obvious fact is that such an amendment is going nowhere as long as the nation has a federal income tax in place as evidenced by the lack of said amendment being even proposed by 2/3rds of Congress in the 100 yrs of the modern federal income tax.
You fight a war, one battle at a time. This my blind friend is a political war to undo 120 yrs of damage, it is not going to be over in a single battle.
I don't recall any of us claiming "vast expertise" and "deep wisdom" (nor do I recall any of your qualifications for that matter).
One needn't have a degree in FairTax to see that it's a truly beneficial tax system in comparison the the income-based ones that have been the mode for almost 100 years now.
No doubt you can't see that, but perhaps you feel you have some superior qualifications, eh?
No, those thing are not the taxable things as you well know, but their milk, bread, cars, etc. are all purchased at retail and if taxable they pay the tax - as will you.
You Squirrels always must try the strawman tactic of misstating what was said, it seems.
A degree in Astrology might help.
Receipt of the "fair" tax entitlement payments don't require the purchase of those things. Or anything at all.
Socialism thinly disguised.
More of your river of misinformation Johnnicakes. the FairTax wipes out the income tax (and others) the IRS (and defunds it) and requires the income tax records to be destroyed. Thewre is no simple restarting of the income tax nor will the voters (now rid of the income tax beast) tread lightly upon those who would attempt it.
It will not return in your lifetime or mine.
Fact is Johnnicakes, there are far MORE tax gatherers than you anticipate right now and none of them do so at anything but their own expense where with the Fairtax they are paid to do so. Even so, they will be far smaller in number than at present. You have no idea how the mechanism works since you haven't read the bill, but are instead grossly mis-assuming how it would operate and claiming things that do not exist.
You can't even understand the selective out of context quotes you present. Go back to peddling tax evasion to chumps. You'll do better at that.
You think that those in the illegal economy buy nothing that would be taxable under HR25???
Not so. Read the bill.
They get the monthly entitlement check regardless of how little, if any, they buy.
Squirm for me.
Those state taxes are very selective taxes rife with exemptions and not the broad-based tax such as the FairTax.
geezer is certainly correct otherwise we would already have had both after almost 100 years of continually increased spending and tax law fiddling. We do not have both as a Federal tax - and we won't for the reasons stated.
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.