Replies

"Every year, the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] determine the "poverty level" for each family size."

There's the mechanism that prevents an administration from increasing the payout beyond the poverty level

It doesn't work. They can simply say the poverty level is $150,000. And even if the result of the calculation was only $1, it would still be income redistribution, and still be socialism.

Ah, your true colors seep through. Dishonesty is okay with you

Liar. My "So?" was simply indicative of me not seeing any real problem with no sales tax being paid on medicines (AIDS drugs, in the particular case). Considering that your alternative is worse than simply not paying a tax, but a government handout to every household in the U.S., it is clear that "Dishonesty" is part of your "true colors". You refuse to admit that a government payout to every household in the U.S. is wealth redistribution. If THAT doesn't qualify as redistribution, I can't think of anything that would.

It certainly does when politicians campaign based on catering to special interest groups with the intent of pushing a Bill through congress to exempt certain items not based on necessity, but rather, based on a certain group of people as promoted by a special interest group's lobbyist lobbying members of congress. It "unequalizes" because only certain special interest groups get exemption

Not true. The product gets tax exemption, not some special interest group. Anybody who purchases that product either pays a tax if the product is taxed, or does not pay the tax if the product is not taxed.

For example, AIDS sufferers get exemptions but glaucoma and Alzheimer's suffers don't

No, people who buy AID drugs get exemptions, whether they happen to be AID sufferers or not (a seemingly inconsequencial difference, but the relevant difference nevertheless). In any case, if medicines were declared tax exempt glaucoma and Alzheimer drugs would almost certainly be declared tax exempt as well. Your alternative is a government payout to every household to pay the taxed on AIDS drugs whether that household purchases those drugs or not.

The FCA "prebate" is integral to the NRST

No it isn't; in fact the opposite is true. Without the wealth-redistributing "prebate" mechanism a national sales tax isn't a bad idea.

and is not a socialist mechanism no matter how loudly you proclaim it is. I'm not lying

A payment by the federal government to every household is quite clearly an instrument of socialism. It is a government handout. If you insist that it is not, you are indeed lying, whether you realize it or not. That it is paid to every household equally, far from negating it's socialistic properties, enhances them.

Which you claim isn't hyperbole. You can't have it both ways -- either you meant it as hyperbole or you meant it seriously. I took it as serious.

I meant it as serious, not hyperbole. The "prebate" system creates the mechanism for full income redistribution, with no safeguards to prevent any future administration from transforming the US into a pure communist economy. And even without such an administration, the "prebate" system, AS PROPOSED, is socialism. The "safeguards" that you mention (i.e., based on poverty level as determined by the HHS) are worthless and essentially non-existent.

The system that you are advocating is fundamentally flawed.

Thank you for clarifying your failed character development. You demonstrated your dishonesty and intent to deceive the reader. Thus rendering yourself not to be trusted or respected because you disrespect the reader. You probably think you can mislead and try to deceive the reader and that they should just comply with you and answer your questions -- you're clueless.

Here's the proof in our discussion:

Technogeeb: There is nothing in the system to prevent an administration from increasing the default payout to every household to be equal to the average income of every citizen. 898

Zon: Every year, the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] determine the "poverty level" for each family size." 900
Here's the paragraph (in red) that was sandwiched in between and is the paragraph Technogeeb dishonestly omitted in his intent to deceive the reader.
[ The monthly FCA for each adult is .23 * (HSS poverty level for a single person)/12 to assure no marriage penalty due to the manner in which the poverty level is dependant on family size. The monthly FCA for each child is .23 * (the incremental increase of HSS poverty level for a family with one child over no child) ] A. Geezer 68
Zon: There's the mechanism that prevents an administration from increasing the payout beyond the poverty level. 900

Technogeeb: It doesn't work. They can simply say the poverty level is $150,000. 901

You don't work. Your brain is steeped in irrationality and has rendered you ineffective. According to your "logic" they can do whatever they want. Thus they can do whatever they want with your preferred plan too. For with any plan you propose they can simply say the _______ (fill in the blank) level is __________ (fill in the blank). For example, they can simply say a 99% income tax will be withheld from all paychecks where the person's annual income level is $10,000 or more.