Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fair Tax Rally To Be On Hannity And Colmes>

Posted on 05/11/2006 5:46:17 PM PDT by Man50D

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,361-1,3801,381-1,4001,401-1,4201,421-1,432 last
To: Principled
Oddly, the structure and numbers are his!

...and My stucture and My numbers add up ... your's don't:

YOUR structure and YOUR numbers lose $0.75. WHERE DID IT GO?

I've never seen someone go to such great lengths to avoid answering a rather simple question. No matter how you try to distance yourself from the problem, the fact remains:


1,421 posted on 06/12/2006 9:24:22 AM PDT by Dimples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1416 | View Replies]

To: Principled
The "average" is 7%.

If you use correct Algebra, it all works. If you use "Principled's Algebra" (an incorrect one) you get wrong answers.

WHERE DID YOUR MISSING $0.75 GO????

1,422 posted on 06/12/2006 9:26:28 AM PDT by Dimples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1419 | View Replies]

To: Dimples
You can find many places (I've just looked) where you assert that a continual price reduction will result in a retail price reduction of the same amount.

I only went back to about 1350 and found it all.

It is amusing to me that you believe I have an error in algebra. It is you with the misunderstandings. We're really not saying anything too different.

My point in this was to demonstrate (among other things) that the amount of tax costs decreases on average per stage.

You vehemently rejected that - it cannnot be that a 5% (for example) reduction in price per stage results in a 5% reduction at retail. I simply cannot fathom anyone grown saying something so stupid.

I did not say the reductions were 5% - it was an example to show the idiocy of your position. I happen to think the average would be somewhat less.

1,423 posted on 06/12/2006 9:26:37 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1418 | View Replies]

To: Principled
You can find many places (I've just looked) where you assert that a continual price reduction will result in a retail price reduction of the same amount.

Show me JUST ONE!!!! POST THE LINK!!!

... it doesn't exist!

Show me just ONE PLACE where my Algebra is incorrect! (You haven't done that either.)

And while you're at it, PLEASE TELL US WHERE YOUR MISSING $0.75 WENT TO ????

1,424 posted on 06/12/2006 9:32:28 AM PDT by Dimples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1423 | View Replies]

To: Principled
... it cannnot be that a 5% (for example) reduction in price per stage results in a 5% reduction at retail. I simply cannot fathom...

In other words, what you cannot fathom is the Algebra! Please, show us where my math is wrong. I've shown you where yours is wrong, show us where mine is wrong.

You have avoided (ignored) EVERY comment I have made regarding your errors. You have not responded to them, not discussed, them, not refuted them, you've ignored them.

You want to have a substantive debate? Then respond directly to me as I have to you.

You have not responded to the issue of the missing $0.75.
You have not responded to the issue of not reducing stage 1 inputs.
You have not responded to the issue of reducing markup % as being a cut in Added Value and Profit, not tax cost.
You have not responded to your use of differing "tax cost as a % of Sale Price" factors at each stage (when you claim to be looking for a single "average".)
You have not responded to your "double discounting" higher level stages (though I noticed you stopped using that technique in your latest example.)
You haven't responded to ANY of my examples, proofs, refutation, or arguments. You ignore them, just proclaim my being in error and restate an incorrect algorithm.

When are you going to engage this discussion and stop avoiding the substance?

WHAT HAPPENED TO YOUR MISSING $0.75?????

1,425 posted on 06/12/2006 9:46:56 AM PDT by Dimples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1423 | View Replies]

To: Principled

He'll never accept the fact that he's answering a different thing than what you posed.

To do so would make him look like the fool he is.

Instead he must fixate upon what he interprets to be YOUR eror (on a scenario of his own devising). Typical.


1,426 posted on 06/12/2006 10:04:13 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1423 | View Replies]

To: Principled
You vehemently rejected that - it cannnot be that a 5% (for example) reduction in price per stage results in a 5% reduction at retail. I simply cannot fathom anyone grown saying something so stupid.
It's not stupid. Listen to what you are saying. If every stage cuts their price 5%, the final price is cut 5%. In fact, only the final stage matters.

What you are suggesting is the first stage cuts their price 5%, and the next a little more than 5%, and the next a little more than that, and the next...

If that were true then it wouldn't be a "5% reduction in price per stage."
1,427 posted on 06/12/2006 10:29:20 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1423 | View Replies]

To: Principled
You vehemently rejected that - it cannnot be that a 5% (for example) reduction in price per stage results in a 5% reduction at retail. I simply cannot fathom anyone grown saying something so stupid.
It's not stupid. Listen to what you are saying. If every stage cuts their price 5%, the final price is cut 5%. In fact, only the final stage matters.

What you are suggesting is the first stage cuts their price 5%, and the next a little more than 5%, and the next a little more than that, and the next...

If that were true then it wouldn't be a "5% reduction in price per stage."
1,428 posted on 06/12/2006 10:29:30 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1423 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare
If that were true then it wouldn't be a "5% reduction in price per stage."
If you remember, the two nitwits were trying to catch us by picking a number that was the "average". Then they would "spread some beans out on a table" and make the number come out to 25%-30% whatever they chose...pigdog quickly bailed and left principled to be his goat.

If you chose a 7% "average" for 4 levels then the bean counters would say the total must be 28%...but they didn't know how stupid they were with the question....now they can't "fathom" why everybody thinks they're math challenged dolts.

1,429 posted on 06/12/2006 8:46:30 PM PDT by lewislynn (Fairtax = lies, hope, wishful thinking, conjecture and lack of logic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1428 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn

I see you've missed the entire argument again - as have your pals.

That's to be expected.


1,430 posted on 06/13/2006 7:46:08 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1429 | View Replies]

To: pigdog
I see you've missed the entire argument again - as have your pals.

That's to be expected.

You're either as brain dead as your friend or you aren't much of a friend to let him continue to make a fool of himself yourselves.

THAT is to be expected from the likes of you.

1,431 posted on 06/13/2006 8:38:17 AM PDT by lewislynn (Fairtax = lies, hope, wishful thinking, conjecture and lack of logic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1430 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
Well, no - you've missed that too. You and your cohort are the ones missing out on what's going on.

But that's not unusual as I said.
1,432 posted on 06/13/2006 1:55:49 PM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1431 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,361-1,3801,381-1,4001,401-1,4201,421-1,432 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson