ANOTHER UNINFORMED FAIRTAX CRITIC

If you are talking about an income tax here count me out! The income tax has GOT to go! It taxes the wrong end of the spectrum and is too easily manipulated to promote class warfare among other things!

And the FairTax can't/wouldn't be manipulated? Gimme a break.

I won't argue that a consumption tax is worse, but I can't argue that it's much better.

Seems as though you want to do it all in one feld swoop. It ain't going to happen that way my friend! It took a LONG time for us to get were we are and it's going to take some time to get us back where we belong and the FairTax proposal is the best idea out there to get us started down that road!

I do.

What I don't want is to spend a lot of effort on something that probably won't work.

The FT is just such a thing. It addresses almost none of the real problems.

What's holding YOU back from running! If ever there was a time for that it is now given the current mood of the country!

My wife, mostly. :)

I’d like to hear what ‘real problems’ you think the FairTax does not address.

I won't argue that a consumption tax is worse, but I can't argue that it's much better.

Come on man! Give me a break!

The income tax requires the modern equivalent of the Spanish inquisition for it's administration and the consumption tax would not require the government to know even so much as one's name as an individual taxpayer!

If you can't see the HUGE difference that would make to the cause of FREEDOM I feel really sorry for you!

I’d like to hear what ‘real problems’ you think the FairTax does not address.

Spending.

The income tax requires the modern equivalent of the Spanish inquisition for it's administration and the consumption tax would not require the government to know even so much as one's name as an individual taxpayer!

Nonsense.

A consumption tax requires the same level of invasiveness at the retail level that an income tax requires at a personal level.

The government will be collecting the same amount of money.

The same level of bureaucracy and control will be mandated.

The exact same levels of corruption, influence and related nonsense will be present.

To think otherwise is to be naive in the extreme.

I thought it was only libtards who trusted the government.

I don't.

The only way for them to function better is to reduce their size substantially.

A government half the size will be twice as good.

A government 1/10th the size will be 10 times better. . .

That's the only way.

Starve them of cash and they'll get there.

Give them new and innovative ways to steal and you'll get more effective thieves.

Any fair tax proponent who believes that there won't be a consumption and an income tax in a few short years is an idiot.

(Another flaw in the FT is that it doesn't irrevocably outlaw an income tax as a provision of its implementation.)

Do you think the architects of the FairTax legislation (H.R. 25) did not consider ‘spending’? Do you think they are idiots?

Let me clue you in....

If H.R. 25 were to write law for cutting spending, what chance would you give for passage? That is passage within our lifetimes, our children's lifetimes and their children's lifetimes.

It is well known to those that have researched and written the FairTax legislation and who continue to perfect it, it is well known to them that spending is out of control in Congress and in many other governments.

Now, if they attacked spending via H.R. 25, would it have a chance to pass? Especially as they need democrats to sign on to it?

I will give you an analogy. Years ago someone had planted bamboo in the garden of the house I bought. When I first purchased it someone had unbeknownst to me cut the bamboo and pulled enough out so that it completely escaped my notice.

And then it grew back with a vengeance. Now any gardener will tell you that bamboo is extremely hard to get rid of.

But bamboo can be ‘contained’ by putting barriers about 3 feet into the ground around it. Then one can get to work of uprooting it and ridding the garden of it. Unless it is wanted, every garden that has bamboo will also have a means to contain it.

Think of government spending as bamboo in a garden. And think of the FairTax as the containment barrier. No the FairTax is not designed specifically to kill overspending, but it provides a framework from which to curb spending abuse.

Your line of thinking is similar to a brutal frontal assault on a powerful enemy. When instead you should be thinking of cutting supply lines or laying siege to fortifications.

A war on spending will not be won if the enemy can escape and live to spend another day. That is why we need a tax system that contains them, so they cannot escape. The FairTax is transparent to ordinary Americans and its NRST rate will be voted on each year by Congress. Therefore, there can be NO MORE SMOKE AND MIRRORS on revenue bills. That means no more escaping from the eyes of taxpaying Americans.

Democrat leaders are against the FairTax, even if some junior democrats are for it they are told by their leaders to be against it or else. The reason is simple, the FairTax will shine a bright light on the way they tax and spend.

So you can think of the FairTax as a big flashlight, or a security system to detect trespassers. It will set off a big alarm to all Americans that some political group is trying to pull a fast one. Without it we can be unaware that someone is robbing us blind. So in general in a war against any form of abuse, we first need monitoring and detection. The FairTax is a system that includes monitoring and detection of spending abuse, and by controlling its NRST rate every year, it becomes a trap for abusers.

The reason the FairTax does not attack overspending is also the same reason that it targets revenue neutrality. Because it does not want to get bogged down in fights it cannot win. But once it is passed, then Americans will have a tool to help see which politicians are working against them.

So don't think for a moment that the leaders of the FairTax movement haven't thought this through, they have and they know what they are doing.

You can be assured that the leaders of the FairTax are heads and shoulders above the Beltway political establishment in tactics and moral purpose. They are smart, damned smart and they know how to win the culture war, the tax war, the spending war and the war against the cancerous 16th amendment.

Now there is one and only one fatal ‘flaw’ in the FairTax legislation, and its leaders know about it and are working to correct it. Do you know what this flaw is? I've given you a clue above.

You are WRONG on many points but I don’t have the time to address them today. I’ll get to it Monday at the latest!

Do you think the architects of the FairTax legislation (H.R. 25) did not consider ‘spending’? Do you think they are idiots?

No and yes.

If H.R. 25 were to write law for cutting spending, what chance would you give for passage? That is passage within our lifetimes, our children's lifetimes and their children's lifetimes.

A lot more than it does now.

I won't support legislation that doesn't address the real issues - that only rearranges the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Nobody with any sense would support that kind of diversionary nonsense.

If you aren't going to address the real issue then what point is there to acting at all?

It is well known to those that have researched and written the FairTax legislation and who continue to perfect it, it is well known to them that spending is out of control in Congress and in many other governments.

And yet they do nothing about it buy proffer this flawed, steaming pile?

And I'm not supposed to think they are idiots?

Now, if they attacked spending via H.R. 25, would it have a chance to pass? Especially as they need democrats to sign on to it?

Absolutely. See above.

I will give you an analogy.

Stupid analogy.

Your line of thinking is similar to a brutal frontal assault on a powerful enemy. When instead you should be thinking of cutting supply lines or laying siege to fortifications.

No, my line of thinking is an assault of some kind.

Yours, the Fair Tax, is painting rocks and hoping the problem will solve itself because the rocks look different.

A war on spending will not be won if the enemy can escape and live to spend another day. That is why we need a tax system that contains them, so they cannot escape. The FairTax is transparent to ordinary Americans and its NRST rate will be voted on each year by Congress. Therefore, there can be NO MORE SMOKE AND MIRRORS on revenue bills. That means no more escaping from the eyes of taxpaying Americans.

[...]

Nonsense all around. The current tax system is just as transparent where it counts. A 3.5 trillion dollar budget isn't something that slips by unnoticed by most folks and the ones that don't notice won't see a difference when all you do is change the method of theft.

The reason the FairTax does not attack overspending is also the same reason that it targets revenue neutrality. Because it does not want to get bogged down in fights it cannot win.

In other words the device and it's proponents are chicken-shits who can't/won't stand a fight.

So don't think for a moment that the leaders of the FairTax movement haven't thought this through, they have and they know what they are doing.

I don't see any evidence of that. Between the massive flaws in the plan itself (socialism, double-taxation and the invitation for multiple forms of taxation, amongst others) and the fact that it doesn't address the real problem I'd say that the leaders have chickened out.

You can be assured that the leaders of the FairTax are heads and shoulders above the Beltway political establishment in tactics and moral purpose. They are smart, damned smart and they know how to win the culture war, the tax war, the spending war and the war against the cancerous 16th amendment.

If this is the best they can come up with then I'm not hopeful and I'm even less impressed.

Now there is one and only one fatal ‘flaw’ in the FairTax legislation, and its leaders know about it and are working to correct it. Do you know what this flaw is? I've given you a clue above.

There are far, far more than one.

The Fair Tax re-taxes fully taxed savings upon implementation.
The Fair Tax includes a socialist "prebate" which pays people to not work.
The Fair Tax does not repeal the 16th Amendment as a condition of its implementation virtually guaranteeing that it will coexist with an income tax if it ever passes (which it won't.)
Most importantly, the Fair Tax does nothing to address the real issue playing games with the method of theft while doing nothing about the fact of it.

Each of these alone is a fatal flaw. The combination is far worse.

You have a goal that millions of other do.

But you have NO MEANS of making a SPECIFIC DETAILED ACTION.

That means we got hot air here.

Your rant is just a rehash of anarchy flavored gas.

It does NOTHING to move the ball to the goalposts.

And if you are going to rebut this post, then BE SPECIFIC as to what spending you will cut, how you will IDENTIFY the powers behind the spending you propose to cut and BY WHAT MEANS (e.g. legislative, armed revolt, screaming like a loon, etc.) you propose to attack the identified powers.

And that is just to start.

Now if you are smart you will back off your inane rant and start thinking with what God gave you between the ears.

You have a goal that millions of other do.

But you have NO MEANS of making a SPECIFIC DETAILED ACTION.

Oh, but I do.

Your rant is just a rehash of anarchy flavored gas.

Perhaps, but it's not anarchy.

It does NOTHING to move the ball to the goalposts.

Actually if it just rebuts one piece of nonsense (FairTax) then it does, indeed, move the ball.

And if you are going to rebut this post, then BE SPECIFIC as to what spending you will cut, how you will IDENTIFY the powers behind the spending you propose to cut and BY WHAT MEANS (e.g. legislative, armed revolt, screaming like a loon, etc.) you propose to attack the identified powers.

Been there, done that.

Spending to cut includes every single unconstitutional program from Welfare to Social Security to Medicare and Medicaid to the bailouts to farm subsidies to foreign aid and so on.

If it ain't in there then it ain't legal. Period.

That's well over 1/2 of the Federal budget.

The only means necessary should be judicial. The problem is that FDR screwed that one up so now we're left with either trusting legislators to do it (not bloody likely) or putting guns to their heads (figuratively or literally, if need be.)

I advocate the latter.

I don't see any reasonable chance of the problems being fixed evolutionarily so it must be a revolutionary change.

Filo, You have just shown yourself to be just another FairTax heckler.

You have no concrete means to achieve the spending cuts you list other than calling for revolution and possibly an armed one. Plus you have no basis to claim the spending entitlements are unconstitutional as you did in your last post.

You have not rebutted the FairTax, you merely dismissed it because it will not and need not list programs to be cut from spending bills.

Instead your leaning to armed revolution does indeed indicate anarchy, yet you claim it is not. I guess you can say whatever you want and find whatever reason that suits your whimsical nonlogic to explain it.

Thank you for showing you are not a serious or valuable contributor to the issue of tax reform. These posts of yours will be used as links to show others what you are about when you chime in to heckle and distract.

Filo, You have just shown yourself to be just another FairTax heckler.

In other words you can't counter what I've said. Understood.

You have no concrete means to achieve the spending cuts you list other than calling for revolution and possibly an armed one.

Incorrect again, although I don't see it happening short of revolution.

It's always possible that people, such as your self, will pry their heads from their arses, but I ain't holding my breath.

Plus you have no basis to claim the spending entitlements are unconstitutional as you did in your last post.

Ouch. You shouldn't display that level of ignorance that openly.

The Constitution and BOR aren't that long nor are they that hard to read. You should try.

You have not rebutted the FairTax, you merely dismissed it because it will not and need not list programs to be cut from spending bills.

Incorrect again. Perhaps it's reading comprehension issues that result in comments like this.

The FT is flawed because it is socialist (prebate.)

It is not tied to the repeal of the 16th which means that it won't take but a congressional session or two for both tax collection methods to be in place.

It is flawed because any pre-implementation savings (which are already fully taxed) will be taxed again post implementation.

And it is flawed because it doesn't actually do anything but rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic. Nothing is gained by restructuring how the government steals if we allow them to continue stealing.

Nothing.

Instead your leaning to armed revolution does indeed indicate anarchy, yet you claim it is not. I guess you can say whatever you want and find whatever reason that suits your whimsical nonlogic to explain it.

The desire to overthrow a hostile government does not mean that I don't want any government.

By your inane reasoning our founding fathers were also anarchists.

I can, however, see that your absolutist mentality leads to conclusions such as this as well as the conclusion that the Fair Tax, flawed as it is, represents the only answer.

Sad.

Pathetically sad, really.

These posts of yours will be used as links to show others what you are about when you chime in to heckle and distract.

Please do. I'm sure someone out there will understand them even though my efforts were completely wasted on you.

In other words you can't counter what I've said. Understood.

True, because what you said is nonsense. And no, you do not understand.

Incorrect again, although I don't see it happening short of revolution.

This is the statement of your that I and others will link to. From my previous post #190 on this thread:
********************************************************** FairTax Supporter: You have no concrete means to achieve the spending cuts you list other than calling for revolution and possibly an armed one.

Heckler Filo: I don't see it happening short of revolution.
**********************************************************

Ouch. You shouldn't display that level of ignorance that openly.

The Constitution and BOR aren't that long nor are they that hard to read. You should try.

No Filo, it is you that needs to review your Constitution and the Supreme Court cases that upheld entitlements. It doesn't mean we agree with them, but YOU haven't provided any background or basis for claiming that current spending is illegal. YOU have only flapped away in the hot gas you created. The number of amendments far exceeds now the original BOR. The Social Security and other payroll taxes are all unfortunately constitutional under the 16th Amendment, and the distribution of those taxes into retirement accounts was upheld in 1937 in Helvering vs. Davis and two other US Supreme Court cases. The debate on limits of spending goes back to Hamilton and Madision.

Filo, it is clear you are out of your league on this website. You can't even string together two sentences that impart information to any reader, other than those that want to witness hot air in type.

The FT is flawed because it is socialist (prebate.)

No Filo, the Rebate is not socialist as it is the same for everyone, about $196 a month for grandmas on social security to billionaires. It means nothing to the latter but a lot to the former. We do not want to tax the poor, but we don't want to have a 'graduated' system of Rebate brackets, so it's the same for everyone and that's why it is called 'Fair'. And it only rebates taxes up to the poverty line, a well seasoned calculational process performed by DHHS for decades.

A Rebate as crafted in H.R. 25 is the most brilliant part of the FairTax legislation. It is simple and it corrects a historical flaw in pre-1913 excise tax America, in that it does not burden the poor farmers more than the rich ones, or the tenant farmers more than the landowners.

The Rebate is what makes the FairTax sensible today. It is only possible today because back in 1913 and up to the age of computers, a broad rebate was not possible to administer, the technology was not there.

The Rebate is not socialist because it does not redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor. It 'rebates' everyone the same exact amount. The rich are not fleeced.

When democrats objected to the FairTax last year because they said it was too onerous to administer, especially a tax rebate to so many millions of Americans, George Bush showed them how wrong they were by mailing 144 million rebate checks to Americans.

If there is one thing the US Government is good at, it is printing and mailing letters and checks.

It is not tied to the repeal of the 16th which means that it won't take but a congressional session or two for both tax collection methods to be in place.

Well finally you scored a point that has been made by myself countless times on this forum. Yes, the flaw in the present FairTax legislation is that it does not repeal the 16th, but that is no reason to not support the FairTax movement because millions of FairTax supporters are aware of this issue and they are putting constant pressure on FairTax leaders to do something about it.

FairTax leaders know they will never pass H.R. 25 until it is tied to repeal of the 16th. They are working on several solutions, one of which is to pass H.R. 25 but not enact it until the 16th is repealed. Another is to 'memorialize' the states to compel Congress to a Constitutional Convention for the sole and exclusive purpose of repealing the 16th.

It is flawed because any pre-implementation savings (which are already fully taxed) will be taxed again post implementation.

Wrong, only spending is taxed, not Roth retirement accounts. Any funds left in a Roth will not be taxed. But under the Income tax the Roth fund growth can still be considered ordinary income upon withdrawal.

The FairTax only addresses spending and it takes 23% of every RETAIL dollar (none from B2B) but at the same time it abolishes on average 20% of present price embedded federal taxes.

As it is now when you withdraw from a Roth tax-free under the restrictions that are placed to do so, then if you choose to spend it on retail items, you are paying embedded federal taxes in the pricing of about 20% inclusive.

Now we can see you are just another FairTax basher because you are spewing the talking points of those that lie about the FairTax and seek to create confusion.

Won't work Filo. Too many people are now on to these kinds of red herrings. As voters gain more educational seasoning, your disruptive backers will have to find new material to cause confusion. Of course they are experiencing it to be more and more difficult to find propaganda and lies by which to slow the FairTax movement.

800 people every day Filo. 800 people everyday 7 days a week on average are joining the FairTax grassroots. You can't, you won't stop it Filo. And your backers know it.

And it is flawed because it doesn't actually do anything but rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The cliche 'rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic' as a figurative reference to a sinking ship has nothing to do with taxation but everything to do with entitlements.

As I said amply in a previous post on this thread to you, the FairTax is a necessary tool to allow Americans to see who in Congress is against them and who is willing to raise taxes for their pet spending riders. Under the FairTax there will be MO MORE SMOKE AND MIRRORS!

Nothing is gained by restructuring how the government steals if we allow them to continue stealing.

As I posted to you on this thread before, right now it is not possible for Americans to see the 'stealing', they can't see it clearly but under the FairTax they will see it.

If you can't see a thief rob you blind and you are offered a flash light or security system to at least know you are being stolen from, are you going to turn it down? Under your tortured nonlogic, the answer is yes, you are going to turn down tools that enable you to get the thieves.

And under the 16th Amendment and its sibbling, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the 'thieves' are stealing LEGALLY.

There's nothing you can do about it other than get ready to repeal the 16th and call for new amendments and legislation.

The desire to overthrow a hostile government does not mean that I don't want any government.

Yeah? Like what kind of government Filo? You think aiding and abetting an overthrow will be controlled? You think you will have any say in the formation of a new government after you have destroyed by 'overthrowing' the present one? You are fool Filo, a useful idiot to some.

By your inane reasoning our founding fathers were also anarchists.

Not by my reasoning Filo. They were anarchists, but principled ones that had no other choice. They had to resort to Anarchy because they had no representation and no political system by which to air and redress grievances. But they left a system in place for you to use, yet you want to overthrow it.

That's unprincipled and pointless anarchy Filo. That's what you subscribe to.

I can, however, see that your absolutist mentality leads to conclusions such as this as well as the conclusion that the Fair Tax, flawed as it is, represents the only answer.

Hallucinations Filo, you are hallucinating.

Sad. Pathetically sad, really.

Yes, as you stand in front of your mirror.

These posts of yours will be used as links to show others what you are about when you chime in to heckle and distract.

Please do. I'm sure someone out there will understand them even though my efforts were completely wasted on you.

Oh there will be other hecklers that back you. The hecklers on these FairTax threads that have nothing to contribute, strive to disrupt, cause confusion, lie and bash. We know who they are and as time goes by, new readers see them for what they are.

That's the company you belong to Filo. Enjoy them.

True, because what you said is nonsense. And no, you do not understand.

I clearly understand far more than you do if you can only see nonsense in what I've written.

Of course the FT that you support is nonsense so perhaps you are just incapable of discerning any difference.

Meanwhile, you are married to a really bad idea and can’t admit it.

Filo: Incorrect again, although I don't see it happening short of revolution.

I absolutely stand behind that.

The FT will not bring about any significant changes in the government, spending or the way that The Constitution is abused.

At best it is merely, as I've said countless times, a rearrangement of the deck chairs on the Titanic.

In reality, because of the shortsightedness, ignorance and arrogance of those supporting the FT, it is likely a stepping stone to a two-method tax entity similar to that employed in other socialist countries where taxes are stolen both when money is earned and again when it is spent.

The FT practically invites this.

No Filo, it is you that needs to review your Constitution and the Supreme Court cases that upheld entitlements. It doesn't mean we agree with them, but YOU haven't provided any background or basis for claiming that current spending is illegal.

Oh I have provided it, I just haven't spelled it out for the likes of you.

It's really quite simple: The Constitution specifically enumerates the powers of the government and the 10th Amendment says categorically that anything not mentioned are reserved for the States or the people.

You don't need any more explanation than that.

There is no provision in The Constitution or any Amendment for the redistribution of wealth (socialism) so it is, therefore, unconstitutional.

That is true regardless of the form it takes.

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid or Fair Tax Prebates.

All are unconstitutional because none are listed as powers of the governent and none have been amended in.

Payroll taxes are now Constitutional but the SCOTUS rulings during the FDR administration are all suspect as they were under duress at the time (look up FDRs threats to pack the court for a bit of an education - perhaps your first ever.)

Filo, it is clear you are out of your league on this website.

Because I'm not a blathering blow-hole such as yourself? Bull.

In the end I've got something on my side that you are sorely lacking: knowledge and reason.

No Filo, the Rebate is not socialist as it is the same for everyone, about $196 a month for grandmas on social security to billionaires. It means nothing to the latter but a lot to the former. We do not want to tax the poor, but we don't want to have a 'graduated' system of Rebate brackets, so it's the same for everyone and that's why it is called 'Fair'. And it only rebates taxes up to the poverty line, a well seasoned calculational process performed by DHHS for decades.

No, it is socialist because wealth is being redistributed from the rich to the poor.

Many of those getting prebates are not paying taxes at all but they are getting "refunds."

Much like today's tax credits and other forms of welfare, that is socialism.

A Rebate as crafted in H.R. 25 is the most brilliant part of the FairTax legislation. It is simple and it corrects a historical flaw in pre-1913 excise tax America, in that it does not burden the poor farmers more than the rich ones, or the tenant farmers more than the landowners.

It is simple class warfare. There is nothing "brilliant" about it. It is just another creative way of punishing success and rewarding failure.

In short, it is pure liberalism.

The Rebate is not socialist because it does not redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor. It 'rebates' everyone the same exact amount. The rich are not fleeced.

Incorrect. When someone gets a prebate on taxes they didn't or won't pay they are getting redistributed wealth.

If you want to get into the charity business then by all means do so.

Do not force me into it via the government. If there is one thing the US Government is good at, it is printing and mailing letters and checks.

Of course. And never once have they mailed their own money. It's always ours.

Too bad you can't understand that simple point.

Well finally you scored a point that has been made by myself countless times on this forum. Yes, the flaw in the present FairTax legislation is that it does not repeal the 16th, but that is no reason to not support the FairTax movement because millions of FairTax supporters are aware of this issue and they are putting constant pressure on FairTax leaders to do something about it.

And those leaders have not responded why?

They are either hopelessly stupid or lazy.

Either way, I won’t trust them.

FairTax leaders know they will never pass H.R. 25 until it is tied to repeal of the 16th. They are working on several solutions, one of which is to pass H.R. 25 but not enact it until the 16th is repealed. Another is to 'memorialize' the states to compel Congress to a Constitutional Convention for the sole and exclusive purpose of repealing the 16th.

If and when I see that happen I’ll at least know that these folks have some honor and sense.

They still have lots to fix, but that one of the big issues.

Wrong, only spending is taxed, not Roth retirement accounts. Any funds left in a Roth will not be taxed. But under the Income tax the Roth fund growth can still be considered ordinary income upon withdrawal.

I am 100% right and you are, as usual, 100% wrong.

I’ve covered this in depth here before.

If I have $100 in my bank right now it is 100% taxed. It is all my money and I can spend it now for $100 worth of goods or services.

If the FT were implemented tomorrow I could not spend that money the same way. I would have to pay the FT on top of my purchase. My purchasing power on that money has, therefore, been reduced by about 30%.

The rest of your argument proves your dishonesty and ignorance.

First of all, the rate I mentioned above is the correct one that corresponds to our current tax system. Your 23% is a dishonest representation as is the entire “smoke and mirrors” inclusive/exclusive discussion.

The Fair Tax is a 30% sales tax. Period.

Also in your discussion you represent the extant “embedded taxes” and even admit that those are lower than the FT rate.

In effect, although you clearly don’t realize it, you have admitted that my savings will be re-taxed.

You admit that those who have saved, either for retirement or just in general, will pay more in taxes because of the implementation of the Fair Tax.

And yet you have the nerve to call the tax fair.

Laughable.

The cliche 'rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic' as a figurative reference to a sinking ship has nothing to do with taxation but everything to do with entitlements.

Cliché my ass. What does the FT actually do? Nothing.

It doesn’t lower taxes, it doesn’t cut spending, it doesn’t eliminate illegal programs, it doesn’t eliminate corruption. It does nothing but change the way the government steals while still allowing it to steal and spend exactly as much as it currently does.

In fact, since the government will be stealing extra money from some of us it exacerbates the problem.

That is exactly rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Meaningless action. Show but no go.

As I said amply in a previous post on this thread to you, the FairTax is a necessary tool to allow Americans to see who in Congress is against them and who is willing to raise taxes for their pet spending riders. Under the FairTax there will be MO MORE SMOKE AND MIRRORS!

And yet it does absolutely nothing in this regard. It’s as if you really believe that our current congresscritters have some way of hiding their votes on pork or taxes.

As I posted to you on this thread before, right now it is not possible for Americans to see the 'stealing', they can't see it clearly but under the FairTax they will see it.

How? What will be different under the new order than the old? What layers of opacity are you stripping away with this boondoggle? Absolutely none.

If you can't see a thief rob you blind and you are offered a flash light or security system to at least know you are being stolen from, are you going to turn it down? Under your tortured nonlogic, the answer is yes, you are going to turn down tools that enable you to get the thieves.

But we already have floods, spotlights and alarm systems and yet we still allow the theft. A flashlight won’t make a difference in the world. Nothing will change and nothing is exactly what the FT offers.

And under the 16th Amendment and its sibbling, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the 'thieves' are stealing LEGALLY.

Ayup. Something else you aren’t changing with the FT.

There's nothing you can do about it other than get ready to repeal the 16th and call for new amendments and legislation.

Not quite. Your absolutism is showing. Again.

Yeah? Like what kind of government Filo? You think aiding and abetting an overthrow will be controlled? You think you will have any say in the formation of a new government after you have destroyed by 'overthrowing' the present one?

As opposed to playing along with one known to be corrupt and broken?

As if tweaking it might change something?

You’d piss on a house fire and call yourself a hero.

You are fool Filo, a useful idiot to some.

That’s precisely how I’d describe you and the rest of the FT blowhards.

Not by my reasoning Filo. They were anarchists, but principled ones that had no other choice.

Really? So they established an anarchy and not a Democratic Republic.

Someone should really update the textbooks. . .

But they left a system in place for you to use, yet you want to overthrow it.

No, my friend. I want to return to it.

That's unprincipled and pointless anarchy Filo. That's what you subscribe to.

Well, if you are stupid enough to call our founding fathers anarchists then that is high praise for which I thank you.

That's the company you belong to Filo. Enjoy them.

I do enjoy people who are intelligent enough to recognize that the FT is a crock.

Not that you need worry, but if you ever make any progress with this nonsense you’ll see us all again.

Good post Filo. You are right about the FairTax— it is a scam.

Most of the FairTax kool-aid drinkers are so blinded they have no idea of what they are supporting...

Some interesting links on my homepage to some discussions from a few years back on a lot of other problems with the FairTax.

Wrong on every point, every one.

For example to say the Rebate is socialist, that it redistributes wealth to those that don’t pay taxes, nothing could be further from the truth.

You are mixing the principles of the FairTax with the present reality of the Income tax.

When a poor retiree living on nothing but a Social Security check and a Rebate under the FairTax, that retiree will be paying the NRST at their grocery markets and any other retail outlet or service.

So right there is a clear example of your false premise.

The others are numerous but I don’t mind to go at them one at a time.

You say you clearly understand more than...yada yada yada....like Fredo in Godfather Part II, “I’m smart, I deserve respect!”

Enough said on that.

As for my claim that you are nothing but a heckler preaching anarchy as a solution, glad to see you admit it with your statement “I absolutely stand behind that.”.

As to your statement that the FairTax will not bring any significant changes yada yada yada....Yeah sure. We know that the FairTax movement will not allow H.R, 25 to be enacted until it is tied to the repeal of the 16th Amendment. This fact and the fact that the FairTax will scrap every line of code in the present Tax Code will not bring about significant changes yada yada ....anyone with a serious interest in tax reform can see you are not to be taken seriously.

As for your clain that Social Security is illegal because it is a redistribution of wealth, again you are hallucinating. That any one would think so is a clear indication of gross ineptitude.

And the same for the FairTax Rebates as described above.

An argument could be made in your favor for Medicare as its payroll tax does not correlate with the degree of cost utilized. And really it is not your argument, it is ours. You just happen to think you’re the only one in the room that can see it, just another indicator of your ‘Fredo’-like personality.

But we have been over this before. The FairTax will never be a spending reduction law. It is a tax law, a tax law that provides Americans with a clear means of seeing who in the government is against them, who is robbing them. Why else is the democrat leadership so much against it?

As for the legality of the payroll tax and the threatened packing of the court by FDR, you can find ‘suspect’ circumstances on about any law passed by democrats, including ratification of the 16th Amendment. The fact is that it is law now, and you can do nothing about it except work to change it. But you don’t want to work, you want to rant on within your framework of feelings for anarchy.

When confronted with the fact that you are out of your league you say you have something on your side: knowledge and reason. Another ‘Fredo’ moment! IS that how you are able to get through your day? “I’m smart, I deserve respect!” Did you ever think for one moment that it is best to allow others of credibility back you on that? Do they? I highly doubt it! Because if they did you would link to them. When a person resorts to Fredoisms, it’s a clear sign of mental imbalance.

As for your disjointed rant about the ‘socialism’ of the Rebate, I’ve already put you in your place in the lead-in to this post.

As to your lame shot about me not understanding that the government mails ‘our’ money to us and others, nothing more needs to be said because it is clearly obvious that it is just you flailing about screaming like a loon!

As to Roth IRAs and such, again your Fredo is out in the open “I am 100% right and you are, as usual, 100% wrong.”, indeed you need to see a doctor. There are people that can help you.

And then you bring out your group’s weakest lie: the 23% verus the 30% lie. It’s this lie of yours and of YOUR GROUP of FairTax bashers that is responsible for winning many more supporters over to the FairTax.

You see, Americans, even those that are products of the worst public schools, they can do fractions and they understand denominators. They can distinguish inclusive fractions from exclusive fractions. The simple example that 1 from 4 is a reduction of 25% and 1 added to three is an increase of 33% can be understood by almost all voters.

And so it is that 23% of a $1 is 30% of 77 cents.

When this is showed to people in discussion, how FairTax bashers try and sow confusion, how they claim that FairTaxers are liars, they get angry, very angry that you would insult them by presuming they are fools. So I say continue on, continue the 23% verus 30% argument. It helps the FairTax movement.

And lastly on that point, when we switch from inclusive fractions to exclusive fractions going from 23% to 30%, we can do the same on the embedded federal taxes in prices of 20% to 25%, We can do the same on payroll taxes going from 15.64% to 18.5%[0.1564/(1-0.1564)]. We can do the same on each tax bracket of the Income tax, and each tax rate will be higher and appear significantly higher as the difference between inclusive and exclusive rate grows with an increase in numbers.

So I won’t say stop playing games. I want you to keep this game-playing up, it is absolutely a selling point for me when people catch onto you and your like.

Now let’s skip to the last point about enjoying ‘intelligent people that know the FT is a crock’. By the way, intelligent people don’t use the street term ‘crock’ in debate. But let’s illustrate this shall we? Look at the poster after your post #194, the one I am responding to here. You will see it is from ‘RobFromGa’ which is my view is an insult to Georgia but in your view is intelligent because he thinks the FT is a ‘crock’.

So let’s see what I respond to him in his post #195. Then tell me if you still think he is ‘intelligent’.

I told you the next time you peeped into these threads that I was going to nail you.

Here it is for all to see:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1887973/posts?page=400#400

And here is my response:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1887973/posts?page=429#429

And just to be clear, your FT basher idiot author made the claim in the first link above:

“Finally, I hit paydirt. It turns out that a married couple with two children who rented their home and made $40,000 would, under the Fair Tax, pay $860 a year more in taxes than they do today.”

And when I checked, it was absolutely false. And I pointed it out to you in the second link above. I had gone ahead and verified the calculation and found this basher of yours had lied, hallucinated, committed gross error or all three.

But the point was you did not apologize. Instead you are just as cocky and errant as you have been as a FT heckler and basher for so long.

And for those that haven’t been driven away by scum bashers of the FairTax on this thread, you can do the calculation for yourself here:

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=calculator

The results for RobFromGA’s idiot author example of a married couple, two children, employed and filing jointly earning gross of $40,000, no deductions, no purchasing of used items (makes the FairTax result worse), paying $1,510 in federal income tax, assuming an average 20% reduction of pre-tax price in retail products and services, the results are:

With the Fair Tax, you get:
25.62% MORE spendable income.
$7,045.95 MORE purchasing power.
$7,304.68 LESS federal taxes.

And yet RobFromGa’s idiot author claims to have hit ‘paydirt’. And yet still RobFromGa never apologized, never admitted to failing to check the author’s veracity. never nothing.

In other words, RobFromGa is a useful idiot to other idiots.

Now let’s hear it from Filo’s inner Fredo!

“Yes, the flaw in the present FairTax legislation is that it does not repeal the 16th, but that is no reason to not support the FairTax movement because millions of FairTax supporters are aware of this issue and they are putting constant pressure on FairTax leaders to do something about it.”

SEC. 401. ELIMINATION OF SALES TAX IF SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT NOT REPEALED.

If the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is not repealed before the end of the 7-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, then all provisions of, and amendments made by, this Act shall not apply to any use or consumption in any year beginning after December 31 of the calendar year in which or with which such period ends, except that the Sales Tax Bureau of the Department of the Treasury shall not be terminated until 6 months after such December 31.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/~c1110uSjAP:e164402:

When a poor retiree living on nothing but a Social Security check and a Rebate under the FairTax, that retiree will be paying the NRST at their grocery markets and any other retail outlet or service.

And it is quite possible that the person in question will receive more from their prebate than they pay in taxes.

When the government takes money from one group and gives it to another that is wealth redistribution.

It is also socialism.

So right there is a clear example of your inability to understand simple concepts. It's no wonder that complex ones like tax policy escape you completely.

As for my claim that you are nothing but a heckler preaching anarchy as a solution, glad to see you admit it with your statement “I absolutely stand behind that.”.

Again you're clearly not bright enough to understand the difference between revolution and anarchy.

How about we try something easier: When was the last time that the government made any substantial change for the better without a revolution?

The closest I can think of was the "Reagan Revolution" and, guess what, that ended pretty quickly. . .

We know that the FairTax movement will not allow H.R, 25 to be enacted until it is tied to the repeal of the 16th Amendment.

How do we know that? Because it's in the bill? Oh, wait, it's not!

[...]the fact that the FairTax will scrap every line of code in the present Tax Code will not bring about significant changes [...]

Correct. Because it doesn't change anything but the method.

Does it really matter if someone shoots you, bludgeons you or stabs you? Granted if you were given a choice you might choose one over the other, but would you consider that real change? Really?

As for your clain that Social Security is illegal because it is a redistribution of wealth, again you are hallucinating. That any one would think so is a clear indication of gross ineptitude.

Not just Social Security but Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare and more.

And it's about reading comprehension and intelligence. Attributes you are sorely lacking.

And the same for the FairTax Rebates as described above.

Well, little man, do feel free to point out where in The Constitution the Federal government is granted the right to redistribute wealth.

Show me the authority for socialist programs.

I'll even hold my breath. . .

Or not.

But we have been over this before. The FairTax will never be a spending reduction law. It is a tax law, a tax law that provides Americans with a clear means of seeing who in the government is against them, who is robbing them.

And yet you've been incapable of explaining how it is any more transparent than the current system.

Sure compliance costs will be less under the FT - no argument there - but how will it be more obvious?

Nobody is going to be fooled into thinking that BO's tax hikes didn't happen, so where is this additional transparency coming from?

Or maybe there just isn't any and you're just blowing smoke.

As for the legality of the payroll tax and the threatened packing of the court by FDR

Well, Mr. Reading Comprehension, I've never said that the 16th was unconstitutional. Fact is that amendment was passed and ratified properly.

The FDR socialist policy, however, never was and it's not Constitutional. The fact that the court was clearly under duress when they approved those regs (after finding them unconstitutional the first time they saw them) makes the precedent invalid along with any subsequent rulings based on it.

There's a difference between that and an Amendment. . .

Or don't you know that?

When confronted with the fact that you are out of your league you say you have something on your side: knowledge and reason. Another ‘Fredo’ moment! IS that how you are able to get through your day? “I’m smart, I deserve respect!” Did you ever think for one moment that it is best to allow others of credibility back you on that? Do they?

Indirectly, yes. When people like you disagree with me it all but defines my credibility.

The rest of what I say stands for itself. Since you are clearly incapable of refuting any of it intelligently I'm clearly on safe ground. . .

As for your disjointed rant about the ‘socialism’ of the Rebate, I’ve already put you in your place in the lead-in to this post.

Without the benefit of credibility or veracity. Well done!

/sarc

As to Roth IRAs and such, again your Fredo is out in the open “I am 100% right and you are, as usual, 100% wrong.”, indeed you need to see a doctor. There are people that can help you.

And yet I am right and you are wrong and this is not doing thing one in your little rant that reverses that in any way. . . not that there could be.

You see, Americans, even those that are products of the worst public schools, they can do fractions and they understand denominators. They can distinguish inclusive fractions from exclusive fractions. The simple example that 1 from 4 is a reduction of 25% and 1 added to three is an increase of 33% can be understood by almost all voters.

Which is why your side likes to play that game when they represent the issue, eh?

Or maybe you're just playing a marketing game. . .

When this is showed to people in discussion, how FairTax bashers try and sow confusion, how they claim that FairTaxers are liars, they get angry, very angry that you would insult them by presuming they are fools.

No, they are deliberately disingenuous. They mislead in order to misrepresent the scope of their lies.

To everyone who pays sales tax the presumption that the 23% you represent isn't really the 30% they are used to is insulting and that is why your side is foolish for playing that idiot's game.

So let’s see what I respond to him in his post #195. Then tell me if you still think he is ‘intelligent’.

At the very least he's smart enough to recognize that the FT is a crock. That's good enough for me and it puts him well ahead of you.

I understand Phil but that’s too risky a provision and must be taken out.

A simple majority could indefinitely extend the NRST while pols pay lip service to ending the 16th.

Boortz had the better idea, get people onboard with the FairTax, pass it but tie its enactment to repeal of the 16th. This would put unbelievable pressure on pols and states to kill the 16th quick.

By the way Missouri just passed its State FairTax. Did you see that? I mention it because once states see the beauty of FairTax legislation, when they become magnets for investors, then the movement at the national level will accelerate.

Now I have to go spin Filo’s head around again hoping to activate any brain matter that may still be alive inside it. Not holding much hope for it.