Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FairTax 101: Making America Great Again
American Thinker ^ | 6/19/2024 | Vince Coyner

Posted on 06/19/2024 8:13:57 AM PDT by spacejunkie2001

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last
To: lewislynn

“The Fairtax was written for businesses collecting and remitting the tax, not the consumer paying the tax.”

So we would have businesspeople now working ~12-hour days having even more work to do than now so some people work save a few hours work each year filling out 1040s?


41 posted on 06/19/2024 10:11:25 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

Great idea. I don’t like the tariff, but at least it doesn’t violate a score of Constitutional rights as the income tax does.


42 posted on 06/19/2024 10:18:07 AM PDT by Stepan12 (Enrique Tarrio? “Remember the prisoners as if chained with them – those who are mistreated…” Hebrew)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paal Gulli

The federal income tax is not fair.

The Fair Tax would be less fair to much of the middle class.

How about concentrating on Making America Great Again so most people can themselves pay for their living expenses?

With a $35 trillion national debt, the rich are going to be a tax target until their financial corpses are cleaned to the bare bone by IRS vultures.


43 posted on 06/19/2024 10:21:37 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

I never got on board with the Fair Tax. Unless something has changed, it relied on silly pre-bates. A massive amount of work. And STILL have progressive effective tax rates.

Nothing wrong with tariffs. I don’t recall a lot of inflation when Trump squeezed China.

Regarding taxing ourselves, the only inherently fair option is consumption tax. Govt should not even know your income rate.

Spending is the real problem. If govt spending affects the rate of the tax on YOUR spending, then you are more likely to oppose wild govt spending. Today, half the population don’t need to care what feds spend because they pay zero net fed tax either way.

People call consumption tax regressive. Nonsense. The tax is entirely fair. Life isn’t.

For those who feel an unconstitutional federal need to address the unfairness of life... please, at least do so on the spending side and quit mucking up the tax side. And, technically, the state level is the only legit place to do such spending.


44 posted on 06/19/2024 10:25:24 AM PDT by BuddhaBrown (Path to enlightenment: Four right turns, then go straight until you see the Light!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stepan12

Even without Amendment XVI, massive federal income taxation is legally possible.

A federal income tax might cut in at $50,000 in California and say $20,000 in Mississippi, with the tax collected on amounts below $50,000 later rebated at 103%.

A federal wealth tax is also legally possible. It might cut in at $5 million in California and $700,000 in Mississippi, with the tax collected on amounts below $5 million later rebated at 103%.


45 posted on 06/19/2024 10:29:31 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: BuddhaBrown

“Nothing wrong with tariffs. I don’t recall a lot of inflation when Trump squeezed China.”

Do you happen to have a currently valid 20% off Harbor Freight coupon?

Do you shop at $1.25 Tree? $1.35 Tree?


46 posted on 06/19/2024 10:39:33 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Pajamajan

Bkmk


47 posted on 06/19/2024 11:44:19 AM PDT by sauropod ("This is a time when people reveal themselves for who they are." James O'Keefe Ne supra crepidam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain

Sounds good to me


48 posted on 06/19/2024 1:12:35 PM PDT by RoadGumby (This is not where I belong, Take this world and give me Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001
1% on all incomes above $3,000 ($95,000 in today’s dollars) and applied to only 3% of the population.

If three thousand dollars in income was the upper 3% of the population, then it would be more than $200,000 in today's dollars, not $95k. Let's check this with gold prices; in 1914, 3,000 dollars could buy you 150 ounces of gold. Today 150 ounces of gold is worth around $300,000. So yeah, $3,000 then was more like $2-300,000 today, which makes a lot more sense given we know that the initial income tax strategy was to target only a small number of high earners. Why the discrepancy? Because the government lies about the true rate of inflation/devaluation of our currency to minimize payouts to service and civil pensions and social security. Pretty much all of this inflation has happened in just the last fifty years or so, since we went off the gold standard.

49 posted on 06/19/2024 1:20:25 PM PDT by LambSlave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spacejunkie2001

Tariffs and reduce income taxes.


50 posted on 06/19/2024 1:23:59 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right
Tariffs are regressive and Free Traitors™ are closet leftists and love the progressive income tax.
51 posted on 06/19/2024 1:25:09 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: LambSlave

I have down that the initial tax brackets, adjusted for inflation to today, were the following:
<$631,000 none
$631,000 - $1,577,000: 1%
$1,577,000 - $2,366,000: 2%
$2,366,000 - $3,154,000: 3%
$3,154,000 - $7,887,000: 4%
$7,887,000 - $15,774,000: 5%
>$15,774,000: 6%


52 posted on 06/19/2024 1:26:02 PM PDT by CraigEsq (,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Mouton

Tariffs are the fairest tax of all. EVERYONE who buys, pays. Don’t want to pay the duty? Then don’t buy.


53 posted on 06/19/2024 1:26:35 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NorthMountain

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are not supported with income taxes. Payroll taxes fund those and those funds are stolen.


54 posted on 06/19/2024 1:28:01 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Leaning Right

Funny how many Freepers love income taxes, like good little progs.


55 posted on 06/19/2024 1:29:03 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: HonorInPa
The interconnectedness of manufactured items makes it way too complex.

Sophistry....

56 posted on 06/19/2024 1:30:18 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: central_va

I think a consumption tax is the way to go also, EVERY consumer pays, EVERYONE has skin in the game!! The very wealthy consume much more expensive items than the lower income people do!! NO LOOPHOLES and NO NON PAYING tax payers!! You purchase items you pay!! NO MORE withholding from pay except SS and DONE easy peasy!! There should be a way for this tax to go straight to the treasury electronically through the business computers EVERY DAY, there should NOT BE any bookkeeping for the businesses money goes straight to treasury!!!


57 posted on 06/19/2024 1:41:19 PM PDT by Trump Girl Kit Cat (Yosemite Sam raising hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: central_va

In theory, the best thing would be to fund the government 100% by tariffs, like in the old days. But someone else here pointed out that in the old days the government was smaller, and didn’t do as much. That’s a fair point.

Do we need a large military capable of fighting two major wars simultaneously? Do we need a safety net for the elderly? Do we need an advanced system of highways? I dunno. But if we do, I don’t think tariffs alone can cut it.


58 posted on 06/19/2024 1:52:36 PM PDT by Leaning Right (The steal is real.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: central_va

It’s still money taken out of my paycheck, it’s still money I will never see, and it’s still a part of what makes Fedzilla oversized.

If you want to fund Fedzilla with 1913 style taxes (as the OP to whom I responded suggested), you have to go back to a 1913 style Fedzilla. Whether you like it or not, that means an end to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid along with all the other stuff I mentioned.

BTW, I’m sure you already know that Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid payments combine to significantly more than half of federal monetary outlays.


59 posted on 06/19/2024 2:05:36 PM PDT by NorthMountain (... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Brian Griffin

Direct taxes have to be apportioned. The 16th amendment did not amend the Constitution. It was and is a scam and is not collected in accordance with that amendment.


60 posted on 06/19/2024 3:02:44 PM PDT by Stepan12 (Enrique Tarrio? “Remember the prisoners as if chained with them – those who are mistreated…” Hebrew)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson