Posted on 09/30/2011 5:41:07 AM PDT by New Jersey Realist
Flat income tax or flat retail sales tax.
Just not both.
I typically don’t read long repetitive posts with fancy writing (for effect), that are addressed to others with an afterthought to me. So if you had something important to say to me, feel free to address me. Thanks!
I agree. I realize that the political process has been corrupted (subversive limiting the number of representatives, 17th amendment, illegal Executive orders) and that nothing will probably be “fixed” by the means currently employed, but a repeal of the 16th amendment is necessary FIRST. Sadly, the use of propaganda, public educators, and the feebie giveaway, have all succeeded in dumbing down the population into a class warfare. The elitists/politicians, have succeeded in turning Americans against one another as scapegoats, when the real problem is that there is no more freedom left in the U.S. and the crony socialists (they are NOT capitalists), alwqays laugh all the way to the bank.
This was explained above. I've actually been here since 1998 or so (maybe 1999, I don't actually remember).
JDW11235 wrote:
“Jeez you’re posting stupid.”
He or she also has a join date of 10 days ago, buyer beware indeed!
Actually, the computer that failed is back, and I can log in with the old account now (and I did post a few things on that account when I got the computer back), but I think I'll probably use this (the ¢ommon ¢ents) account going forward.
An individual’s full tax burden is collected from purchases under the nrst. Income and its reporting are irrelevant.
Only part of an individual’s tax burden is collected from purchases under the income tax. Hence [read slowly], individuals who do not report income and do not pay tax on income are paying less than their full share.
Duh.
If someone who now pays only part of his taxes begins paying his full amount, he’ll be paying more. You say otherwise. That’s just dumb.
Why not choose something REAL about the nrst? How about the problem of after tax savings being taxed when spent? How about the rebate being too high? Those issues are real and fruitful discussion ensues.
Really?
Principled wrote:
An individual’s full tax burden is collected from purchases under the nrst. Income and its reporting are irrelevant.
So, let me ask you this. Let's pretend again that the FairTax is law of the land. I'm a merchant (and not a supporter of the FairTax). I pay the FairTax on all my groceries, my gas, everything I buy.
However, becuase I don't agree with the FairTax, I don't collect it on things I sell in my store. I don't report my sales every month or remit any FairTax on my sales. I seem to get a lot of business now, because my prices are lower than my competitors who collect the FairTax.
Is it your position that I'm still paying my full share?
Still the shiny objects? Really?
Taxes are paid by individuals, not business.
Whether the retailer collects and remits under the nrst is not relevant to your previously stated position that failing to pay income tax does not affect revenues. Failing to pay income tax does affect revenues - by reducing it. Have a half million people do it and it affects it that much more.
If those half million people paid their full share, that would indeed affect revenues. C'mon. How about some super-duper shiny object, lots of cool html, and some more unrelated crap now?
If that's all that changes, you would be right. However, you're ignoring the other half of the "underground economy" transactions. If there are a half million drug dealers start paying taxes under the FairTax, there's also several million drug buyers who are paying income taxes under the current system, who stop paying taxes under the FairTax when they purchase new drugs from their drug dealers.
Principled wrote:
If those half million people paid their full share, that would indeed affect revenues. C'mon. How about some super-duper shiny object, lots of cool html, and some more unrelated crap now?
If millions of other people who are paying taxes now, stop paying taxes at the same time that your half million start paying taxes, then it's a wash. You want to ignore that part. That's dishonest.
Let me lay this out for you:
| Under Income Tax | Under NRST | |
| Customer of drug dealer Earns money (income) to buy drugs | Taxed | Untaxed |
| Drug Dealer sells drugs to customer | Untaxed | Untaxed |
| Drug dealer spends money | Untaxed | Taxed |
Under the NRST, The drug dealer pays taxes when he buys stuff, 100% of the taxes due, I'll grant you that. However, under the NRST, the drug dealer's customers don't pay any income tax on their income. That's going to be a negative for revenues that offsets the taxes paid by the drug dealer. The "underground economy" transaction goes untaxed under either system.
Under the NRST, the drug dealer is selling new goods. He is required by Section 103(a) of the FairTax bill to collect sales tax on his sales, and remit those taxes to the government. That's not going to happen. The "underground economy" transaction will still be untaxed.
It doesn't matter if the drug dealer cheats by not reporting his income under the income tax, or if he cheats by not reporting his sales and remitting the sales tax. Cheating is cheating, and it happens under either system.
Are you still around?
This reply is the newest I can find.
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.