You're a liar and a paid poster.
I didn't zero in on anyone - you made that up. YOU zeroed in on the "rich". I didn't even say that. YOU did. My post pointed out that people who don't currently collect sales tax can do so trivially.
You're all over the place talking about a zillion things b/c your goal isn't to argue the merits of the nrst, it's to keep the status quo.
The nrst is revenue neutral b/c by law it has to be. C'mon. We're wise to you.
I'll start with the "paid poster" part. I didn't know that there was such a thing. When do I get my check?
Principled wrote:
You're a liar and a paid poster.
FYI, I actually pay to post here. I try to give at least once or twice a year, even if I can't really afford it. I've been on FreeRepublic since 1998 or so, but under a different user name. I didn't get banned, I had a computer failure and I don't have access to the email associated with the other account, nor do I have the password. I guess I could have called JimRob or JohnRob, but my "old" handle was a little dated anyway, so I signed up as a new user with a new email.
Actually, back on Post #80 I said, “This ranges from lawyers, doctors and accountants all the way down to landscape services, painters, roofers and pool cleaning services.” I'm not sure where you picked up "dentists," but you chose to omit most of my examples. You chose to focus on 2 out of the 7 I mentioned, plus the one you added.
Principled wrote:
I didn't zero in on anyone - you made that up. YOU zeroed in on the "rich". I didn't even say that. YOU did.
Now, you've called me a liar. Where did I lie? Or will you apologize for that?
Maybe for the examples you focused on it's trivial. However, it's not trivial for small businesses with many mobile technicians in vehicles. The examples I gave are some valid ones. These businesses don't currently collect sales taxes, and the changes to their businesses to implement the Fair Tax will not be trivial. The solution would be to use a tax base more similar to what states already tax.
Principled wrote:
My post pointed out that people who don't currently collect sales tax can do so trivially.
To do that, and still feed the beast of a government that we have today (and that Fair Tax supporters don't want to cut), the rate would be prohibitively high, or it wouldn't be anywhere close to "revenue neutral."
Fair Tax supporters wouldn't think of scaling back spending as part of their proposal, to keep thing balanced at lower revenue levels. Fair Tax supporters seem to be happy with the current spending and taxation levels. Their issue seems only to be the way the taxes are collected today.
Actually, there is no law requiring that. There is House Rule XXI, clause 10, which is often called the "PayGo rule." That's not a law.
Principled wrote:
You're all over the place talking about a zillion things b/c your goal isn't to argue the merits of the nrst, it's to keep the status quo.
The nrst is revenue neutral b/c by law it has to be. C'mon. We're wise to you.
Even House Rule XXI, clause 10 doesn't require revenue neutrality. It requires any bill that comes to the floor to be "balanced" and offset revenue reductions with either other revenue increases in other areas, or with spending reductions to balance the net revenue reductions.
Of course, the progressives that support the FairTax (there are a fair number of progressives among the cosponsors) won't consider any spending reductions. That's what makes.
I don't support the status quo. I want Washington to spend less and tax us less. The Fair Tax does neither, that's why I don't support it.
What I do favor is less spending. I also would support any tax proposal which meets item four from last year's "Contract from America.":
The FairTax, as outlined in H.R. 25, doesn't come close to that. Cut it back to 4,543 words or less and get back to us.
4. Enact Fundamental Tax Reform
Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words—the length of the original Constitution.
Really? Wow!
Principled wrote:
Yes, common cents. Lawn services will carry cash registers on their tractors. And swipe machines on the weed-whackers.
Tell me, will they get a federal grant to pay for these things?
Actually, I mentioned the lawn guy because he has a FairTax bumper sticker on his truck. I asked him if he was looking forward to reporting his sales monthly, and collecting and remitting the FairTax. I also pointed out that our state will probably find it "beneficial" to start taxing us on his sales as well (services like his are untaxed in my state). Oddly enough, after reading more about the FairTax, he covered up his FairTax bumper sticker.
The FairTax is great if you only read the front page at FairTax.org. The problem is, if you read the actual bill, H.R. 25, the details have some serious issues. And I haven't mentioned some of the bigger constitutional issues with it.