I think you're being a bit naive to believe it would eliminate such. Instead, I see the "partisan bickering" moving to the subject of the amount of the "prebate", with continual increases in this amount (automatic cost of living adjustments, increases to special interest groups such as people that need to purchase AIDS medicines, etc)
With an increased tax rate for baby diapers, AIDs medications, etc. to go right along with it.
Perceived cost vs benefit to the majority, will be the rule of elections. Not cost vs benefit to minority interest as it is today where most taxes are hidden from view from the majority of the electorate.
until the worst fears of a socialist state are realized.
And exemption of specific goods and services selected by special interest pressure and desire to social engineering is going to prevent this how?
The real issue comes down to what the American people will allow given knowledge of cost of government intimately in their lives as opposed to special interest benefits they can garner.
FCA allows perception of the cost when NRST is paid at the register by everyone all the time.
Exemption of goods and services creates classes of folks who perceive little to no cost with respect to received benefit.
Under the current system, those receiving the benefits are not those who perceive the burden and out vote the burdened minority. Exemption of tax payment of any sort perpetuates that creation of taxpayers vs benefit receivers whether under an goods exempted NRST or Income/Vat system.
The FCA/NRST system requires payment of the tax regardless of benefit, thus provides a clear perception of cost, as well as perception of benefit.
If the burden is not perceived by certain groups of voters, how can they possibly be motivated to hold government accountable for excess.
"Let virtue, honor, the love of liberty ... be ... the soul of this constitution, and it will become the source of great and extensive happiness to this and future generations. Vice, ignorance, and want of vigilance, will be the only enemies able to destroy it."
-- John Jay, co-author of the Federalist Papers and, later, Chief Justice of the supreme Court
"Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
-- James Madison (Letter to W.T. Barry, August 4, 1822)
That is the purpose of assuring that everyone pay a tax at the register on all goods and at rates equal to those of everyone else, that the burden be perceived as well as any benefit or largess arising of ones own particular situtation.
Zon: Not as bad as Technogeeb mischaracterization of the FCA as a "redistribution mechanism"877 -- despite having it previously explained to him that it's not redistribution because every household receives an equal size check each month. 888
If every household receives an equal size check each month, then this is redistribution.
As I said and you, oh so conveniently omitted (in bold): "every household receives an equal size check each month. That is, all single-person households get the same check as do all two-person house holds get the same check as do three-person households get the same check, etc." Not all households receive the same size check because not all households have the same number of people.
Why not eliminate this problem and instead of creating a bureaucracy (which introduces the risk of overt socialism whenever some future administration decides to implement it), simply make things that are deemed "necessities" tax free?
Their will be no bureaucracy needed beyond a household telling the government how many people are in the household and the government sending them a check each month thereafter. As I said in my last post:
(which introduces the risk of overt socialism whenever some future administration decides to implement it), simply make things that are deemed "necessities" tax free?
I gave the rationale in my last post to you:
Zon: ...rather than exempt a slew of different items that would cause even more politicians and bureaucrats committing "look busy" partisan bickering (work) and special interests' "bribery" forever fighting over what should be exempt and not exempt the government won't exempt anything and just send each single-person household a $170 check each month. Thus cutting out the partisan bickering and special interest bribes that are partially responsible for creating the leviathan government in the first place. 888
That irrational will not exist with the rational FCA. But that's the irrationality and bureaucracy that you'd get by exempting necessities.
Instead, I see the "partisan bickering" moving to the subject of the amount of the "prebate", with continual increases in this amount (automatic cost of living adjustments, increases to special interest groups such as people that need to purchase AIDS medicines, etc) until the worst fears of a socialist state are realized.
You claim to argue against socialism while at the same time you either ignorantly or intentionally make arguments in favor of socialist/fascist tax-and-control mechanism -- controlled by bickering politicians, bureaucrats and special interest group/lobbyist bribery. The present graduated income tax is a socialist/fascist control mechanism. I won't stoop to your hyperbole and call it the worst socialist state already realized. The NRST is not a socialist tax-and-control system of collecting revenue. Yet you claim the NRST would be a socialist tax-and-control mechanism that would be worse than the present tax-and-control system.
(automatic cost of living adjustments, increases to special interest groups such as people that need to purchase AIDS medicines, etc)
That's what you get via exempting necessities from NRST: special interest groups "bribing" government officials to get AIDS medicines and etcetera exempt from the NRST. Plus, politicians campaigning on the benefits to specific groups of people rather than benefits to equals/individuals. As if any group can be proclaimed from on high to be more important or deserving then one person or one individual.
Your attempts to paint the FCA as a redistribution scheme and the NRST as a socialist tax-and-control mechanism is disingenuous or ignorance at best and intent to deceive at worst.