You have no idea what you are talking about. How long have you been posting to FairTax threads? I have never seen the discussion you are describing on a single one.
What is discussed on these threads is the merits and demerits of the FairTax plan, as well as other possible solutions to our tax and spending problems.
And your "pro-IRS" gratuitous snark is a common one which is not based on anything except a lack of substantive argument on the part of FairTax cult members. So, you resort to cheap parlor tricks.
Typing too fast to read what you yourself wrote on this very thread?
224. "a FairTax and an income tax which is the only logical conclusion"
You wrote that shortly after making a negative comparison to the VAT in Europe. There's also post 268, which says "a credit/invoice VAT is no different than a NRST", referring to several posts claiming "Mexico has exactly what the unfairtax would become". Mexico, of course, has a VAT. I know you didn't make those posts, but you claimed never to have seen anyone make such an argument.
282. "It would end up between 40-50% in all likelihood."
My 40% claim was on the low end, but accurate. Not every poster makes all three claims simultaneously, although most bring them all out eventually. This thread is not unique in that regard; I have seen similar statements in almost every FairTax thread I've read.
And your "pro-IRS" gratuitous snark is a common one
Look, the truth hurts, and I wouldn't want to be called pro-IRS either. But the fact of the matter is that you are by definition pro-IRS. We are discussing a proposal that would eliminate the IRS. You are opposed to that proposal, and have not suggested an alternative or a modification that would also eliminate the IRS. As you post on virtually every FairTax thread you find, you are in favor of "incremental improvements in what we already have"...which is the IRS.
I'm not saying you're marching in the streets for a bigger, more powerful IRS. But there is a side of this debate that wants to eliminate the IRS and a side that does not. You are not neutral and have not suggested another alternative, which puts you squarely on the side of people who do not want to eliminate the IRS. People who do not want to eliminate the IRS will continue to hear that they are pro-IRS, as it is an indisputable conclusion.