Their position is becoming crystal clear to me now.
Posted on 05/11/2007 5:30:56 AM PDT by Dick Bachert
After several years of FairTax threads, there is a lot of truth in that simple statement you made. I think you might've hit the nail squarely on the head.
FairTaxers like many true believers in a cause, are incapable of seeing the truth and are completely resistant to any viewpoint that is outside of their preconceived understanding. They are totally illogical when it comes to discussing the subject of their adoration, just like cult members.
another FairTax ad hominem
Yes yes yes those unedjoomecated FairTaxers! They are the world’s plague!
Yes they be cultish and illogical just like the 64 sponsors of the FairTax in Congress.
Of course. We FairTaxers are the plague, are we not?
Not really, you overestimate yourself. To be a plague you’d have to be effective. I would characterize you more as a nusiance akin to a small swarm of buzzing gnats. Splat!
It was YOU I was trying to educate.
What, pray tell, is wrong with being average? Most of us fall within the average range, you know.
And I have even offered a solution to them:
If the Fair Tax takes effect, have all prior after-tax savings put into special accounts that can be accessed with special Debit Cards and all purchases with that already-taxed money will be exempt from the Fair Tax when you purchase an item.
Simple solution, right?
Yet, the reaction I get from them is that nobody has savings or that it really doesn't matter because prices will drop and...yadda, yadda, yadda.
They refuse to even address the issue.
Well, screw 'em. Until they start addressing this very real issue they will get nowhere with their Fair Tax.
The reason that your idea will not work is because if they exempted all that money, the FairTax rate on the rest would have to be even higher to make up for the loss of revenue.
John Linder has admitted that one of the beauties of the FairTax is that it is a “tax on accumulated wealth” so it isn’t likely that they will turn around and exempt accumulated wealth is it?
Think about the opposite situation, someone who is a big debtor and owes $75,000 in credit card bills, two car loans for a total of $50,000 and a $500,000 mortgage balance and a home equity line of credit. Every single one of those items would now be paid off in the “new dollars” so all debtors would right off the bat owe about 15-25% less “work hours” to pay off their debts.
Does this seem possible without the whole thing being a big free lunch scheme?
Their position is becoming crystal clear to me now.
Look, friend, just the fact that any time the NRST rate is quoted, it specifies "inclusive", not just 23%, is a rather large hint, don't you think?
If the real price that the buyer ends up paying is really $123 on a raw price of $100, you would just have said, "It's $123." That's all you have to say. The end, no further. Yet there is this political type two step around the question. 
It’s not BS. Once again you show you have not done your due diligence and you jump to conclusions without checking facts or performing calculations.I love the "It's on the FairTax website" defense. Too bad they're not interested in the truth.
It’s on the FairTax website.
The upper 10 % pay the majority of the taxes in this country.You believe you misquoted the IRS. Maybe you would like to link to the stat on the IRS site.
What, pray tell, is wrong with being average? Most of us fall within the average range, you know.Statistics show that the average American is average.
I guess elimination of the estate tax is compensation for double taxation in old age - of course that doesn't help the average retiree much.
Except in Hostage's world and in Lake Wobegon, where we're all above average.
If you go into a store to purchase an item and it has a price tag on it of $100, when you go to the register to check out it will ring up for $100. Not $123. Not $130. But $100.
You believe you misquoted the IRS. Maybe you would like to link to the stat on the IRS site.
I will make one change to the above post. Lets limit it to income taxes.
A majority of income taxes are paid by the top 5% of wage earners. They pay 53.25%. Change it to the top 10% and they pay 64.89%.
If you go into a store to purchase an item and it has a price tag on it of $100, when you go to the register to check out it will ring up for $100. Not $123. Not $130. But $100.There is absolutely no requirement in the bill for prices to be listed tax inclusively. None. The only requirement is that the tax inclusive price - in addition to the tax exclusive price - appear on the receipt.
A majority of income taxes are paid by the top 5% of wage earners. They pay 53.25%. Change it to the top 10% and they pay 64.89%.You statistics are worthless without telling us what share of income those percentiles made. (They're old stats, too.) This is a typical trick to make federal taxes in general, and income taxes specifically, appear much more progressive than they are. In 2001 (the year of your stats), the top 10% of earners made 43.11% of all the income and paid 64.89% of income taxes. And this ignores the more regressive taxes like payroll taxes.
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.