The FairTax Thread: Discussion Only

[SuBe]

From Neal Boortz blog:

FAIRTAX, THE TRUTH ... COMING TOMORROW
Yes, I know I dwell on this a lot in the Nuze. Web Guy tells me that I get emails every day telling me that I'm just in this for the money. You know, there is just no way in the world you're going to escape those types of criticisms. So I don't let them slow me down a bit. Trust me, if I was going to write another book for the money it wouldn't be on taxes and it wouldn't be coming out in a trade paperback format that you can buy for under 10 bucks.
Anyway ....
A lot has happened since we shocked the DC establishment with the FairTax book in 2005. Books on taxes just flat-out don't debut No. 1. The FairTax Book did. Since that time it has been virtually impossible for any Congressman or Senator to show up at a town hall meeting without having to field questions on the FairTax.
Over the past three years I've been buried under stacks of letters from these elected officials .. letters sent to constituents in response to queries about the FairTax. To put it in polite language ... I've never seen such a collection of unadulterated bull**** in my entire life. That, my friends, is why Congressman Linder and I wrote FairTax, The Truth.
Some have asked if this new book explains the FairTax in detail. I'll give that a qualified yes. You don't, however, get the benefit of the complete story behind the FairTax and our current tax system. More importantly, I think, is the fact that FairTax, The Truth responds to the misinformation, confusion and outright lies that have been spread throughout the media relating to the FairTax:

The FairTax does not increase the price of everything you buy by 30%
The FairTax does not put an increased burden on the poor. It literally "untaxes" them.
The FairTax does not destroy the middle class.
Scientologists had nothing to do with it.
What is the truth behind the "you get to keep your whole paycheck" concept
Retired Americans living on their investments and savings are not "double taxed" by the FairTax.
The FairTax rate will not have to be 40, 50 or 60 percent.
The FairTax will not "destroy" our economy, no more than nutritious food would damage a starving child.We've been listening for a couple of weeks now about some sort of a grand economic stimulus plan from our keepers in Washington. They're idea of economic stimulus is to put about $600 or so in the hands of millions of carefully selected Americans ... .selected on the basis of vote-buying. It's a joke, my friends. All these politicians have been doing is trying to target some specific voters out there with a little walking-around money in order to get their support in November.

You want economic stimulus? Great .. I'll give you some economic stimulus. How about making the United States the number one tax haven for business in the entire world?
How about freeing up anywhere from $300 to $500 that is spent by Americans and businesses to comply with our current tax code?
How about bringing some of that $13 trillion – that's with a "t" – that has been working overseas to escape our punishing tax system, bringing that money back home to work here, in our economy.
Instead of giving some households a $600 goodie just this once, how about giving every legal household in this country hundreds of dollars every month to offset the taxes on their basic necessities.
How about totally removing the tax component from all capital and labor in this country.
How about letting people invest with untaxed dollars, and then not taxing the profits from those investments?To paraphrase Crocodile Dundee ... "Economic stimulus? That's not economic stimulus. This is economic stimulus."
Come on, folks ... we can DO this. It is clear that the politicians have to be drug into this kicking and screaming ... as does anyone who thinks that America is great because of government. You have to remember ... you're still running the show out there. Every single one of those congressmen out there is up for reelection this year ... and your vote counts just as much as the next voters.
http://boortz.com/images/fairtax_the_truth.gifThis election year is showing all of us just how elected officials like to manipulate the tax code in order to favor their constituents and punish those who don't vote for them. For months now we've been hearing calls for more taxes on the rich, more rebates for the poor, and a variety of ideas as to how to use the tax code to change people's behavior. This has to stop.
Many historians have written that this country will be doomed to destruction once a good segment of the voters figure out that they can use their ballots on election day to reach into the pockets of those who have more money, and grab some for themselves. The FairTax will make people keep their hands in their own pockets, not yours.
Don't you just love the idea of watching the moving vans pull up to those law offices on K Street after the FairTax is implemented? All those thousands of lawyer-lobbyists packing their gear to move off to greener pastures somewhere else ... weeping at the loss of their six-figure incomes earned by manipulating the current tax system for the benefit of their clients.
We can do it. We can drag these politicians kicking and screaming to the FairTax. We can make them willing – though reluctantly – participants in the greatest transfer of power from the government to the people since our Constitution was ratified. We can do it with our emails, our letters, our confrontations at town hall meetings, our persistence and our votes. This country is too precious to do anything else.
FairTax, The Truth, Answering the Critics hits the book stores tomorrow. Buy one. Buy a few. This week is crucial. We sell enough copies – the book debuts at or near the top – and every single vote-hunting politician inside the Beltway knows that this idea is still alive, still strong, and still something to be reckoned with. If you can't get to a book store, click here for Amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com/FairTax-Answering-Critics-Neal-Boortz/dp/0061540463/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1202688837&sr=8-1) and here for Barnes & Noble.com (http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/results.asp?WRD=boortz&z=y). You'll have your book by the end of the week.

[Handsome Rob]

From Neal Boortz blog:

Thanks for reminding me!

[CorpusBlack]

Gotta pick this b-tch up.

[Handsome Rob]

Already picked it up today on my lunch break.:grin:

[CorpusBlack]

I'll probably pick it up next week, as I'm going to a Boortz book signing.

[terry78]

What's up with this rebate we're supposed to be getting in May?

[SuBe]

What's up with this rebate we're supposed to be getting in May?
That has nothing to do with the Fairtax. But, I can tell you how under the Fairtax, we wouldn't need a rebate from the Government to "stimulate" the Economy because the Fairtax is it's own "Stimulas" Package.

Other than you reading through the entire Thread (Which I would prefer, as there are a ton of information in there). But Here we go:

The Reason we "need" a stimulas package is to put more money in your pocket for you to go out and purchase goods (Mostly from China, BTW) and put money into businesses. Then the Businesses would collect more taxes to pass on to the Government and be able hire more people that would reduce the Unemployment by a small percentage. But this Stimulas package only puts $168 Billion back into the Economy.

Under the Fairtax, with no Tax Liability to Businesses and Investments (as you would pay taxes at the Retail Level, not Taxing Corporations that eventually get passed onto the Consumer anyways, see previous posts on this subject), people that have investments in off-shore accounts would beable to re-invest that money in American Banks and Investment houses. Now that that Money ($10-12 TRILLION, 2005 Estimates) would return to the US Economy, that makes the $168 Billion look like a drop in the Bucket.

Now, under the Fairtax, you receive 100% of your paycheck, you pay taxes when you want to (as you purchase goods), you receive a Prebate that would cover your taxes on Food and Necessities (please see previous posts for more information), More Foreign businesses would move to the United States as they would have Zero Tax Liability and Complience Costs, which means more Jobs. The Export Market in this Country would increase because the Fairtax wouldn't apply to US Made Goods sold abroad, which all Means more Money Flowing into the Economy, which means more Jobs at US Born Businesses. Every Transaction made at the Retail level would be taxed, which means when Washington makes a decision, they have to worry about the affect on the Economy, as a lower economy means lower revenue for the Government.

I know your original Question had to do with the Rebate of the Stimulas Package, but the Fairtax would be it's own Stimulas Package.

Thanks for the Question.

[SuBe]

Plan taxes what you spend, not what you earn

http://abclocal.go.com/static/art/global/icon_wjrt_byline.gif By Gabe Gutierrez
MID-MICHIGAN (WJRT) -- (02/12/08)--Some Michigan lawmakers are pushing a plan that would wipe out your state income tax.
The so-called "Fair Tax" would tax what you spend, not what you earn.
It's a cornerstone of Mike Huckabee's presidential campaign.
"Right now, Michigan is broken," said Rep. Fulton Sheen (R-Allegan).
Story continues below (http://abclocal.go.com/wjrt/story?section=news/local&id=5953122#bodyText)
Advertisement

Now lawmakers want to bring a similar version of the Fair Tax to Michigan and simplify the tax code.
"This doesn't raise taxes. It takes a bad taxation system and replaces it with a better one," Sheen said.
Here's the idea: The state income tax would be gone. In its place would be a 9.75 percent sales tax. And there would be no taxes on business-to-business transactions.
"Not only is it a tax cut, but it will be a strong stimulus," said Rep. Dave Robertson (R-Grand Blanc).
"There definitely would be winners and losers in this," said economist Prof. Keith Moreland.
Moreland says such a huge tax overhaul is unlikely, but has its benefits.
"One group that it would definitely benefit are high-income earners who save their money," he said.
Brenda Monty would also see a change -- initially. The groceries she's buying for her mother aren't taxed now, but would be under this plan.
"I don't want to see them do it to tell you the truth," she said.
But Fair Tax supporters say a monthly rebate would offset costs for food and other necessities.
"So really, low-income people are better off in the Fair Tax economy than they are in the current income tax economy," Sheen said.
The Michigan Fair Tax Association is trying to collect more than 400,000 signatures by July to put the Fair Tax on a ballot.
Right now, there are seven states without an individual income tax.

(Copyright ©2008 WJRT-TV/DT. All Rights Reserved.)

I thought that this is interesting. Michigan has one of the worst State Economies in the Country. Such a System would very much benifit everyone there.

[Malice]

So far what I have read on the thread, I am ok with it...
I read the first page of threads and am slowing going thru them

[SuBe]

So far what I have read on the thread, I am ok with it...
I read the first page of threads and am slowing going thru them
Thank you for showing your interest in the FairTax. If you have any questions at all, please post them. Even if they've been asked before, I'll answer them. If I don't know the answer, I'll find out for you.

[StorminNorman]

I really want the FairTax. The thing I like most is the business that would come from America due to the tax code.

Maybe 2016 :(

[SuBe]

I really want the FairTax. The thing I like most is the business that would come from America due to the tax code.

Maybe 2016 :(
It could happen sooner. All we need to do is write our politicians to let them know that we support the FairTax (Called HR25 and S125 in Congress, House and Senate respectively) Go to Town hall Meetings, ask them whether they support the FairTax and let them know your vote counts on it. Ask both Political Parties. Their Number one concern is getting re-elected. Let them know how important it is to you.

This Tax Plan is 100% up to you, the individual. Politicians are not going to be in favor of it, unless you tell them you are! Thanks for being on board!

[Malice]

It could happen sooner. All we need to do is write our politicians to let them know that we support the FairTax (Called HR25 and S125 in Congress, House and Senate respectively) Go to Town hall Meetings, ask them whether they support the FairTax and let them know your vote counts on it. Ask both Political Parties. Their Number one concern is getting re-elected. Let them know how important it is to you.

This Tax Plan is 100% up to you, the individual. Politicians are not going to be in favor of it, unless you tell them you are! Thanks for being on board!

or get elected thru the Get Out Of Our House (http://www.goooh.com) Campaign and vote for it yourself.

[CorpusBlack]

I'm still waiting to see what's going to happen with McCain after his meeting w/ Linder. If he ends up supporting the FairTax, he is going to get my vote. Man, I never thought I'd vote for a Republican, but IMO the Dem candidates do nothing for me and the FairTax is my most important issue at this point (as many other issues will be resolved w/in the FairTax system).

[SuBe]

I'm still waiting to see what's going to happen with McCain after his meeting w/ Linder. If he ends up supporting the FairTax, he is going to get my vote. Man, I never thought I'd vote for a Republican, but IMO the Dem candidates do nothing for me and the FairTax is my most important issue at this point (as many other issues will be resolved w/in the FairTax system).
Thanks, me too. The FairTax would fix so much that is currently going bad with this country. I support any candidate that Swears they would support and Sign the Fairtax.

[CorpusBlack]

Thanks, me too. The FairTax would fix so much that is currently going bad with this country. I support any candidate that Swears they would support and Sign the Fairtax.

I'm not a Huckabee fan by any means, but his support of the FairTax has me hoping he might become McCain's running mate, thus strengthening the possibility of a better tax system.

[SuBe]

I'm not a Huckabee fan by any means, but his support of the FairTax has me hoping he might become McCain's running mate, thus strengthening the possibility of a better tax system.
Agreed. :up:

Hell, I'd even support a Demacrat, if they would sign the FairTax Act tomorrow. I believe that most issues we are facing today are temporary, but the FairTax would fix our system for Many Generations to come.

[YsoSerious]

The fair tax idea sounds great to this middle class person, but to think that a house and senate full of rich people will pass it is a pipe dream.

[CorpusBlack]

The fair tax idea sounds great to this middle class person, but to think that a house and senate full of rich people will pass it is a pipe dream.

Then you need to read through this thread more closely as it benefits them too. :up:

[SuBe]

The fair tax idea sounds great to this middle class person, but to think that a house and senate full of rich people will pass it is a pipe dream.
That is exactly the reason we need this. The Politicians have every reason to not want the FairTax to go through. They lose Political Power Over YOU! They can't play the Political Games that have been done since Greek Times.

If we had the Fairtax, Politican's would have to be re-elected on they're work, not on promises. They can't promise to Tax the "Rich", because then they would increase taxes on everyone. But, they can lower taxes on everyone. They won't have Lobbyists bribing them for votes anymore.

We have to stand together if we want the FairTax to go through. We have to want the Economic Liberty that would come with the Fairtax. We have to Tell those people that is supposed to be serving us that this is what we want!

[CorpusBlack]

That is exactly the reason we need this. The Politicians have every reason to not want the FairTax to go through. They lose Political Power Over YOU! They can't play the Political Games that have been done since Greek Times.

If we had the Fairtax, Politican's would have to be re-elected on they're work, not on promises. They can't promise to Tax the "Rich", because then they would increase taxes on everyone. But, they can lower taxes on everyone. They won't have Lobbyists bribing them for votes anymore.

We have to stand together if we want the FairTax to go through. We have to want the Economic Liberty that would come with the Fairtax. We have to Tell those people that is supposed to be serving us that this is what we want!

Yes, they lose that power. However, monetarily (apart from kickbacks via lobbyists) it will still benefit them and the economy as a whole. It's time to let these ****ers know!

[CorpusBlack]

By the way SuBe, thanks for the greatest thread ever! Aaand the greatest honey ever!

http://content.costco.com/Images/Content/Search/942438bs.jpg

[SuBe]

Yes, they lose that power. However, monetarily (apart from kickbacks via lobbyists) it will still benefit them and the economy as a whole. It's time to let these ****ers know!
Exactly, Under the FairTax, when the Economy is booming and Consumer Spending is up, the Government would have more Revenue. Which, the Economy is gaurenteed to Boom because of the New Businesses, Foreign Businesses, Increase in Takehome Pay, the Increase in Exports due to Lower US Made Costs.

The Economy would grow to unimaginable hightes, which means so does Governmetn Revenue. They should be happy about that.

[SuBe]

By the way SuBe, thanks for the greatest thread ever! Aaand the greatest honey ever!

http://content.costco.com/Images/Content/Search/942438bs.jpg
Why you are Welcome my Friend. This Thread is supported by people like you that have an Interest and Desire to have Congress Pass the Most Privately Research piece of Legislation in American History. The FairTax. This is amazing that this thread is still alive, but the More People know about the FairTax, the more Likely we have a shot at getting it passed.

Plus the Honey will taste better when it is paid for with your Prebate!

[CorpusBlack]

Why you are Welcome my Friend. This Thread is supported by people like you that have an Interest and Desire to have Congress Pass the Most Privately Research piece of Legislation in American History. The FairTax. This is amazing that this thread is still alive, but the More People know about the FairTax, the more Likely we have a shot at getting it passed.

Plus the Honey will taste better when it is paid for with your Prebate!

Prebate paid honey! I never even thought about that! YES! :up:

[rdh007]

For those who believe FactCheck.org:

Unspinning the FairTax
May 31, 2007

Summary
In our recent article on the second GOP debate, we called out Gov. Mike Huckabee as well as Reps. Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter for their support of the FairTax. We wrote that the bipartisan Advisory Panel on Tax Reform had “calculated that a sales tax would have to be set at 34 percent of retail sales prices to bring in the same revenue as the taxes it would replace, meaning that an automobile with a retail price of $10,000 would cost $13,400 including the new sales tax.” A number of readers pointed out that H.R. 25, the specific bill mentioned by Gov. Huckabee, calls for a 23 percent retail sales tax and not the 34 percent used by the Advisory Panel on Tax Reform. That 23 percent number, however, is misleading and based on some extremely optimistic assumptions. We found that while there are several good economic arguments for the FairTax, unless you earn more than $200,000 per year, fairness is not one of them.

http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/unspinning_the_fairtax.html

[CorpusBlack]

For those who believe FactCheck.org:



http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/unspinning_the_fairtax.html

That's from the Giuliani school of misinformation. Not only is it vague, it is ripe with bull****. All I can say is to read both books or read through this thread. I'm not going to waste time repeating what has been said umpteen times in pages previous.

[SuBe]

For those who believe FactCheck.org:



http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/unspinning_the_fairtax.html

I think that it is extremely Naive of you to put all of your support in FactCheck.org. Below is the AFFT's response to your article:


A FairTax(SM)rebuttal
Response to FactCheck.org article “Unspinning the FairTax”


June 2, 2007
The FactCheck.org/Joe Miller article conclusion:
“We stand behind our earlier analysis of the FairTax.
(A) The proposal to which Gov. Huckabee referred is not a 23 percent tax, but rather a 30 percent tax.
(B) And it is revenue-neutral only through an accounting trick.
(C) It will collect more money from those earning between $15,000 and $200,000 per year and less from those earning more than $200,000 per year.
(D) It is possible that the FairTax would make most people better off, but much of that gain would be a direct result of making the tax code less fair.”
The letters in parentheses have been added to aid the reader in following the response.
Introductory remarks
Americans For Fair Taxation’s many supporters throughout the country attempt to consistently monitor reports and representations about the FairTax from Web sites, media outlets, and public figures. Recently, we noted that FactCheck.org a site apparently devoted to “objective” analysis had taken a very biased tone against the FairTax and was propagating false and misleading statements. We shared with FactCheck.org our view that tax reform, like so many other national public policy issues, must be resolved in the crucible of public opinion based on accuracy. And because of the impartial reporting for which FactCheck.org is supposed to be devoted, we expressed to them grave concern that false and misleading facts appeared on their site in “Unspinning the FairTax” posted on May 31, 2007. We did so in the hope they might correct the misstatements and ensure that future reporting is more accurate.
The ability of the American people to properly analyze candidates and the policy they support is only as good as the accuracy in the analysis and reporting. And that, in a nutshell, is the very important mutual goal we share.
Unfortunately, we were successful only in part. Despite our telephone discussion with Joe Miller of FactCheck.org, FactCheck.org refused to correct blatant errors; for example, insisting that presentation of a chart on distribution that purported to be the FairTax but actually was an entirely different tax plan was acceptable. We pointed out to FactCheck.org that the FairTax taxes all consumption above the poverty line equally at 23 percent. We explained why the FairTax was more progressive and was revenue neutral. We also detailed that under the FairTax the vast majority of American families will be much better off because the economy will boom, U.S. economic competitiveness will be enhanced, compliance costs will fall, and incomes will grow. According to measures that capture real-world economic effects, the gains disproportionately go to low- and middle-income groups. Americans For Fair Taxation regards such an outcome as fair, just, and equitable.
We will continue to work to ensure accurate reporting on behalf of Americans For Fair Taxation. In the meanwhile, we want our supporters to understand the nature of FactCheck.org’s mistakes and biased effort.
(A) The proposal to which Gov. Huckabee referred is not a 23 percent tax, but rather a 30 percent tax.
This sentence is false and misleading. The FairTax is a 23 percent tax as measured by the same basis we measure all of the federal taxes it replaces.

The FairTax rate, measured the way existing U.S. federal taxes are measured, is a tax imposed at 23 percent. As Americans For Fair Taxation has noted in every opportunity on our Web site, in testimony, and in public position papers the FairTax rate can be considered to be 30 percent, but only if one measures the FairTax in a “tax-exclusive basis.” The fact that, by FactCheck.org’s own admission, 85 percent of our supporters who contacted your organization in regards to the article “get it” says that we must be doing a good job of explaining the importance of this distinction. (To further ensure that this is understood, we have revised this explanation and posted it on our home page. The text of this explanation appears at the end.)
Measuring the income tax in a tax-exclusive basis would result in completely different rates of the income tax. For instance, that a middle-income taxpayer in the 25 percent income tax bracket today would be in a tax-exclusive tax bracket of 48.5 percent because they would need to earn $148.50 to have $100 to spend after income and payroll taxes. In fact, this taxpayer’s total tax-exclusive rate is 67.5 percent because we should consider employer payroll taxes. According to the President’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform’s final report, “Economists have found, however, that the burden of the employer’s portion of the payroll tax is largely passed on to employees in the form of lower wages” (page 29).
Somehow, income tax proponents never get around to mentioning that the tax-exclusive tax rate on middle-income taxpayers today is over twice the FairTax 30 percent tax-exclusive tax rate.
Since the FairTax is a replacement for income and payroll taxes, and they are both measured, reported, and quoted on a tax-inclusive basis, it is appropriate to use the 23 percent tax-inclusive rate when referencing the rate. To do otherwise as FactCheck.org seeks would actually be misleading. In other words, apples should be compared to apples, not to oranges, and the tax-inclusive rate of the income and payroll taxes today should be compared to the tax-inclusive rate of the FairTax tomorrow.
To quote the tax panel’s final report, “Although tax-exclusive and tax-inclusive rates are both valid ways of thinking about tax rates, the easiest way to compare the retail sales tax rate to the state sales taxes paid by most Americans is to consider the tax-exclusive rate. On the other hand, it is appropriate to compare the retail sales tax rate with current income tax rates by utilizing the tax-inclusive rate” (page 208). We don’t disagree. That is why we refer to the rate in the appropriate tax-inclusive manner.
(B) And it is revenue-neutral only through an accounting trick.
This sentence is false.
FairTax.org acknowledges that increased revenue from taxing federal government consumption is exactly canceled by increased costs in the federal budget (as pointed out by the tax panel). What the tax panel neglected to point out is that this accounting method is used today by the Office of Management and Budget and the Congressional Budget Office.
The FairTax taxes all consumption, including government consumption, once. Today, the income tax and payroll tax are imposed on government consumption by taxing government employees and government contractors, making government pay more than it would in the absence of these taxes. This tax revenue appears in the receipts column in the federal budget, and the added expense is counted in the federal budget as spending (exactly canceling each other out). Fortunately, at least in this respect, the federal budget is honestly presented.
This tax revenue currently “paid” by the federal government is part of the tax revenue that the FairTax replaces. The federal government could artificially reduce both spending and tax revenues by exempting its workers and contractors from both income and payroll taxes and lowering wages paid to employees and amounts paid to contractors accordingly. Similarly, the FairTax taxes government consumption and, like today, the expense and revenue would be reflected on the federal budget as such. If the FairTax were to exempt government from tax and if federal spending were held constant, then the purchasing power and size of the federal government as a share of the economy would be dramatically increased. Further, not taxing government consumption would artificially make government consumption appear cheaper and promote increased consumption via government. So, though a wash, there would be negative economic consequences if the FairTax did not continue the practice of taxing government consumption. [1] This is not an accounting “trick” any more than it is an accounting trick to tax government workers and the income of government goods and services providers today.
Footnote: [1] For a detailed description of the FairTax base and step-by-step explanation of the rate calculation methodology, see Bachman, et al., 2006

(C) [The FairTax] will collect more money from those earning between $15,000 and $200,000 per year and less from those earning more than $200,000 per year.
This sentence is false. And FactCheck.org's own document shows their statement to be false.

FactCheck.org’s statement is based on a U.S. Treasury Department analysis (Figure 9.4 of which is shown) of a plan which is not the FairTax. The chart and the Treasury study depict an alternative retail sales tax plan invented by the Treasury Department that had a different tax base than the FairTax. In fact, the chart depicts a “plan” that does not repeal payroll taxes, which are 41 percent of personal income taxes, and leaves out more than $771 billion in regressive taxes that fall mostly on the poor and middle-income wage earners.[2] Although the chart label refers only to federal income taxes paid, this point is not made in the discussion of the results, thus almost begging for the reader to wrongly infer that the distributional picture portrays the FairTax.
According to the Brookings Institution’s Tax Policy Center, the payroll tax is very regressive with respect to current income, and in 2006 most Americans paid more payroll taxes than income taxes. “Among households with wage earners, 86 percent have higher payroll taxes than income taxes, including almost all of those with incomes less than $40,000 and 94 percent of those with incomes less than $100,000.” [3]
The chart below shows that for those with incomes less than $23,700, their payroll taxes were over 5 times their income taxes. For those with incomes between $23,700 and $42,305, their payroll taxes were 2.5 times their income taxes. Only in the highest income group do income taxes exceed payroll taxes. [4]
Footnotes:
[2] See IRS SOI Tax Stats-IRS Data Book: 2006. Available at http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/table_1_2006_dp.xls (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/table_1_2006_dp.xls).
[3] Burman and Leiserson, 2007.
[4] Payroll and income tax data.
http://www.fairtax.org/images/content/pagebuilder/12975.jpg
Since the payroll tax is regressive and is the largest tax paid by lower- and middle-income Americans, ignoring the fact that the FairTax repeals payroll taxes is tantamount to ignoring what the FairTax is when analyzing the FairTax.
A recent study by Dr. Laurence Kotlikoff, that does analyze the distribution of the FairTax, was conveniently ignored by FactCheck.org, although brought to their attention. That study finds that the FairTax lowers remaining average lifetime tax rates,[5] thereby enhancing overall progressivity. This occurs because the reduction in rates is proportionately much greater at the low end of the earnings distribution than at the high end.
With respect to those earning $15,000 to $200,000 per year compared to those earning over $200,000, his results clearly demonstrate that the former experience a greater percentage tax cut than the latter. In the following table, each of the income groups between $15,000 and $200,000 has a lower lifetime tax burden under the FairTax. The two groups above $200,000 ($250,000 single and $500,000 married) also have a lower tax burden under the FairTax.
Let’s look at the middle-aged couple with two children earning $20,000 per year compared to that same couple earning $70,000 per year or $500,000 per year. In switching to the FairTax, the low-income couple’s FairTax rate is only 1.5 percent versus 11.0 percent under the current system. The middle-income couple earning $70,000 has a FairTax rate of 11.6 percent compared to 21.3 percent under the current system. The high-income couple earning $500,000 has a FairTax rate of 20.5 percent versus 35.6 percent under the current system. The low-income couple gets an 86 percent cut in their average remaining lifetime tax rate; the middle-income couple gets a cut of 46 percent, whereas the high-income couple gets a 42 percent cut.

Footnote: [5] The rates referred to above are average remaining lifetime tax rates, which take into account total tax payments net of Social Security benefits that the household will pay in its remaining lifetime. They measure the household’s future tax burden under the FairTax compared to what it would have to pay if the current tax system remains in place.
Average remaining federal lifetime tax rates the current system vs. the FairTax:
http://www.fairtax.org/images/content/pagebuilder/12922.jpg
Source: Kotlikoff and Rapson (October 2006), Table 5.
http://www.fairtax.org/images/content/pagebuilder/12921.jpg
In fact, even ignoring economic growth, lower compliance costs, better international competitiveness, higher wages, and other positive effects of the FairTax on the well-being of the American people and adopting outmoded “static” analyses of the distributional impact of the FairTax, households spending up to $50,000 annually will be better off.[6]
Footnote: [6] Tuerck, et al., “A Distributional Analysis of Adopting the FairTax: A Comparison of the Current Tax System and the FairTax Plan,” 2007.

[SuBe]

Countinued:


(D) It is possible that the FairTax would make most people better off, but much of that gain would be a direct result of making the tax code less fair.
This sentence incorrectly assumes that economic growth will be distributed unfairly. The FairTax is called “fair” because it disproportionately benefits the poor and middle class and the economic studies support this statement.
The FairTax entirely untaxes the poor and reduces the tax burden on the near poor substantially. The FairTax taxes all consumption above the poverty line equally at 23 percent. The FairTax is progressive, and by two out of three commonly used measures of progressivity is more progressive than the current system. Finally, and most importantly, under the FairTax the vast majority of American families will be much better off because the economy will boom, U.S. economic competitiveness will be enhanced, compliance costs will fall, and incomes will grow.
By measures that capture real-world economic effects, the gains disproportionately go to low- and middle-income groups. Americans For Fair Taxation regards such an outcome as fair, just, and equitable. We believe that the American people do as well.
A Gini coefficient is a standard measure of inequality.[7] The higher the number, the more progressive the tax. Conversely, when looking at an income distribution, the lower the number, the more evenly distributed it is.
http://www.fairtax.org/images/content/pagebuilder/12923.jpg
As can be seen from the chart above, the FairTax has a higher Gini coefficient than any other tax except the estate and gift tax, and is therefore more progressive than all taxes except the estate and gift tax as measured by its impact on expenditure per capita.
Footnote: [7] For an explanation of the Gini Coefficient, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient).

http://www.fairtax.org/images/content/pagebuilder/12919.jpg

The FairTax makes spending after tax more equal and income after tax somewhat less equal.[9]
Laurence Kotlikoff of Boston University, using a methodology considering lifetime effects, found that virtually every income and age cohort would be better off under the FairTax but that those in the lower-income groups are disproportionately better off. For example, take a middle-aged couple with two children earning $20,000 per year compared to that same couple earning $70,000 per year or $500,000 per year. The low-income couple gets an 86 percent cut in their average remaining lifetime tax rate; the middle-income couple gets a cut of 46 percent, whereas the high-income couple gets a 42 percent cut.[10]

His study uses a dynamic life cycle general equilibrium model to simulate the impact of the FairTax on the U.S. economy. The inclusion of demographics, including a realistic initial age structure of the population, realistic mortality rates, and realistic fertility rates means that the model is able to show how the economy fares over time in the absence of tax reform compared to how the economy fares with the FairTax enacted. Switching to the FairTax precipitates a very major increase in the U.S. capital stock and real wages over the course of the century, prevents what would otherwise be a doubling of the highly regressive payroll tax, and effects very major welfare gains, particularly for the poorest current and future members of society. Implementing the FairTax at 23 percent gives the poorest members of the generation born in 1990 a 13.5 percent welfare gain. Their middle-class and rich contemporaries experience a 5 and 2 percent welfare gain, respectively.[11]
Only studies that adopt a one year or very short horizon and look at income class show the FairTax to be less progressive than the current system. These studies use data showing that poor people in the aggregate spend many times their income year in and year out which is, of course, impossible. What is really going on is that many who are counted as poor are business owners who lost money, students living off of their parents, or those with illicit or unreported sources of income. The studies are inherently flawed.
To be accurate, FactCheck.org should include the Kotlikoff studies on distribution that specifically examine the FairTax.
Footnotes:
[8] Tuerck, et al., op. cit.
[9] Ibid.
[10] See Table 5 in Kotlikoff and Rapson, 2006.
[11] Jokisch and Kotlikoff, 2007.

Other points made by FactCheck.org
[C]onsumers would pay taxes on a great many things that may not intuitively seem like consumption. The list would include:

(E) Interest on credit cards, mortgages and car loans
This sentence is misleading. The FairTax does tax the loan service charges or fees charged by the lending institution to the borrower. If the lending institution does not separately state these charges, but rather rolls them into the interest rate for the loan, then a portion of the interest is really hidden services charges. The FairTax taxes only that small portion of interest. For example, on a typical home mortgage only about one-half of one percent of interest is subject to tax. This represents the value of the financial intermediation services provided (such as loan origination fees, loan servicing fees, etc.) that are disguised as “interest” today. Thus, on a $200,000 mortgage the FairTax liability (calculated by the bank) would be $230 per year or only $19 per month.
A more noteworthy effect of the FairTax on interest, which dwarfs the above, is that the FairTax will bring down interest rates by about 25 percent.[12] This would reduce the homeowner’s payment from approximately $1,200 per month to $1,014 per month, a monthly savings of $186 per month (based on an average existing mortgage rate of 6.0 percent which decreases to 4.5 percent under the FairTax.)
(F) The result is that many FairTax supporters (about 15 percent of those who wrote to us, for example) do not understand that the 23 percent figure is tax-inclusive.
When 85 percent of the public understands a relatively complex tax issue, then it would seem that FairTax is (1) not being misleading and (2) doing a pretty good job of explaining the issue. We would bet that those same people do not know that the current income, payroll, capital gains, alternative minimum, and estate taxes are also expressed as tax inclusive, which is the whole reason for making the honest comparison in the first place.
(G) In other words, proponents assume that no one will cheat on taxes.
No, but we do assume that the FairTax will do a better job of reducing the amount of cheating that is rampant today. The FairTax would reduce tax evasion by reducing the marginal tax rates and therefore the incentive to cheat and by increasing audit rates and therefore the likelihood of tax evasion being caught. Audit rates would increase because audits would be much simpler and more could be undertaken (assuming that appropriated enforcement resources are held constant). Overall administration and enforcement would be more efficient, given the vastly reduced number of collection points (e.g., there are about 20 or so million taxpayers under the FairTax versus 155 million today).
Footnote: [12] Several economic studies have estimated that switching from an income tax system to a consumption tax system such as the FairTax would result in an interest rate drop of approximately 25 percent. See, e.g., Golob, John E., “How Would Tax Reform Affect Financial Markets?” Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Fourth Quarter, 1995.

Revised explanation of 23 percent rate vs. 30 percent rate
Perhaps a simple example will explain best.
Assume there is a worker named Joe who earns $125 and spends all of his earnings. Let’s further assume that the government requires him to pay $25 in taxes.
If the government put a tax on Joe’s income, he would earn $125 before tax and would have $100 after tax to spend at the General Store. Thus, Joe has to earn $125 to have $100 to spend. Joe would also have to file an income tax return.
If the government put a tax on what Joe spends, he would earn $125 and would have $125 to spend at the store. Of the $125 paid by Joe to the storekeeper, $100 would be for the goods he bought at the store and $25 would be taxes that the storekeeper would send to the government. Joe would not have to file a tax return, as the storekeeper sends the tax in to the government.
Either way, Joe pays $25 in taxes and the government gets $25 in taxes. With a tax on income, Joe pays the $25 directly to the government, and with the tax on spending (sales tax), he pays the $25 in taxes indirectly when he buys something from the General Store. The General Store sends the tax that Joe paid to the government.
http://www.fairtax.org/images/content/pagebuilder/12920.jpg
We may report the tax rate as $25/$125 = 20 percent, which is the tax-inclusive rate (meaning that the tax is included in the base). Alternatively, we may think of the tax rate as $25/$100 = 25 percent, which is the tax-exclusive rate (meaning the tax is excluded from the base).

The 23 percent FairTax rate set out in HR 25/S 1025 is a tax-inclusive rate, as is the current individual income tax, whereas most state-level sales taxes are quoted on a tax-exclusive basis. For ease of comparison, Americans For Fair Taxation gives the tax rate both ways. Both rates pertain, since the FairTax is a tax on spending that is replacing an income tax system, and 23 percent correctly represents the tax burden compared to the current income tax system.
It is both inaccurate and misleading to say, using the above example, that the income tax is 20 percent and the sales tax is 25 percent. This implies that the sales tax burden is higher, when in fact the burden of the two taxes is precisely the same either both taxes are 25 percent or both taxes are 20 percent.
References
Americans For Fair Taxation (AFFT), “Promoting home ownership: How the FairTax’s benefits for homeowners exceed the mortgage interest deduction,” February 2007. Available at http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/PromotingHomeOwnership.pdf (http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/PromotingHomeOwnership.pdf).
AFFT, “The FairTax and economic growth,” April 2006. Available at http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/TheFairTaxAndEconomicGrowth.pdf (http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/TheFairTaxAndEconomicGrowth.pdf).
AFFT, “The FairTax prebate explained,” February 2007. Available at http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/FairTaxPrebateExplained2007.pdf (http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/FairTaxPrebateExplained2007.pdf).
AFFT, “What the federal tax system is costing you besides your taxes,” April 2007. Available at http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/WhatTheFederalTaxSystemIsCostingYou.pdf (http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/WhatTheFederalTaxSystemIsCostingYou.pdf).
An Open Letter to the President, the Congress, and the American people Concerning Reform of the Federal Tax Code. Available at http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/Open_Letter.pdf (http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/Open_Letter.pdf).
Arduin, Laffer & Moore Econometrics, “A Macroeconomic Analysis of the FairTax Proposal,” June 2006. Available at http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/MacroeconomicAnalysisofFairTax.pdf (http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/MacroeconomicAnalysisofFairTax.pdf).
Bachman, Paul, Jonathan Haughton, Laurence J. Kotlikoff, Alfonso Sanchez-Penalver, and David G. Tuerck, “Taxing Sales under the FairTax: What Rate Works?” Published in Tax Notes, November 13, 2006. Available at http://www.beaconhill.org/FairTax2006/TaxingSalesundertheFairTaxWhatRateWorks061005.pdf (http://www.beaconhill.org/FairTax2006/TaxingSalesundertheFairTaxWhatRateWorks061005.pdf) .
Burman, Leonard E. and Greg Leiserson, “Two-Thirds of Tax Units Pay More Payroll Tax Than Income Tax,” Tax Notes, April 9, 2007. Available at http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/1001065_Tax_Units.pdf (http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/1001065_Tax_Units.pdf).
Chamberlain, Andrew and Gerald Prante, "Who Pays Taxes and Who Receives Government Spending? An Analysis of Federal, State and Local Tax and Spending Distributions, 1991-2004,” Tax Foundation Working Paper No. 1, March 2007. Available at http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/wp1.pdf (http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/wp1.pdf).
Jokisch, Sabine and Laurence J. Kotlikoff, “Simulating the Dynamic Macroeconomic and Microeconomic Effects of the FairTax,” National Tax Journal, forthcoming, 2007. Available at
http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/FairTax%20NTJ%20Final%20Version,%20April%2024,%202 007.pdf (http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/FairTax%20NTJ%20Final%20Version,%20April%2024,%202 007.pdf).
Kotlikoff, Laurence J. and David Rapson, “Comparing Average and Marginal Tax Rates under the FairTax and the Current System of Federal Taxation,” NBER Working Paper No. 12533, revised October 2006. Available at
http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/Comparing%20Average%20and%20Marginal%20Tax%20Rates %2010-17-06.pdf (http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/Comparing%20Average%20and%20Marginal%20Tax%20Rates %2010-17-06.pdf).
President’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform, “Simple, Fair, and Pro-Growth: Proposals to Fix America’s Tax System,” November 2005. Available at http://www.taxreformpanel.gov/final-report/ (http://www.taxreformpanel.gov/final-report/).
The FairTax Act of 2007, 110th Congress, introduced by John Linder, January 4, 2007. Available at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/thomas (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/thomas).
Tuerck, David G., Jonathan Haughton, Keshab Bhattarai, Phuong Viet Ngo, and Alfonso Sanchez-Penalver, “The Economic Effects of the FairTax: Results from the Beacon Hill Institute CGE Model,” The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University, February 2007.
Tuerck, David G., Jonathan Haughton, Paul Bachman, Alfonso Sanchez-Penalver, and Phuong Viet Ngo, “A Distributional Analysis of Adopting the FairTax: A Comparison of the Current Tax System and the FairTax Plan,” The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University, February 2007.
Tuerck, David G., Jonathan Haughton, Paul Bachman, and Alfonso Sanchez-Penalver, “A Comparison of the FairTax Base and Rate with Other National Tax Reform Proposals,” The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University, February 2007.

What is the FairTax Plan?
The FairTax Plan is a comprehensive proposal that replaces all federal income and payroll based taxes with an integrated approach including a progressive national retail sales tax, a prebate to ensure no American pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar federal revenue replacement, and, through companion legislation, the repeal of the 16th Amendment. This nonpartisan legislation (HR 25/S 1025) abolishes all federal personal and corporate income taxes, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, and self-employment taxes and replaces them with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax administered primarily by existing state sales tax authorities. The IRS is disbanded and defunded. The FairTax taxes us only on what we choose to spend on new goods or services, not on what we earn. The FairTax is a fair, efficient, transparent, and intelligent solution to the frustration and inequity of our current tax system.
What is Americans For Fair Taxation (FairTax.org)?
FairTax.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, grassroots organization solely dedicated to replacing the current tax system. The organization has hundreds of thousands of members and volunteers nationwide. Its plan supports sound economic research, education of citizens and community leaders, and grassroots mobilization efforts. For more information visit the Web page: www.FairTax.org (http://www.fairtax.org/) or call 1-800-FAIRTAX.

[StorminNorman]

SuBe I must say I am quite impressed with your determination.

You have converted me. I have converted others.

Well played sir.

[SuBe]

For those who believe FactCheck.org:



http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/unspinning_the_fairtax.html
If you actually look into the Article instead of taking it for face value, you would see that when the Presidential Tax Commission reviewed the FairTax, they changed the parameters in which it is measured. They did not take into account the Lack of Complience Costs, which is $250-500 Billion a year, the People that would be introduced as the Tax Base: The Illegal Immigrants, People that currently evade Taxes, Tourists, and the "Underground Economy". When they Studied the FairTax, they changed it to make their Arguement. So, when they Studied it, they didn't look really look at it. Do a little research on your own, Hell! read the thread and don't put all your eggs into FactCheck.org.

[SuBe]

SuBe I must say I am quite impressed with your determination.

You have converted me. I have converted others.

Well played sir.
Thank you StorminNormin. You might not believe this, but that means a lot to me. :woot:

[CorpusBlack]

FactCheck.org is just a Wiki with fancier more colorful graphics.

[SuBe]

I just found this. If you are willing to help thet cause of getting the FairTax Passed in Congress. You can go to this site and email your Representatives:

http://www.fairtax.org/campaigns/support_fair_tax.html

Thank you for your support. Again, if anyone has any questions about the FairTax, please post it.

[CorpusBlack]

Has there been any word on McCain's meeting w/ Linder?

[SuBe]

I haven't heard an update yet. I'll try to find out tomorrow.

[CorpusBlack]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v517/CorpusBlack/taxmonkey2.jpg

[StorminNorman]

Badass

[SuBe]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v517/CorpusBlack/taxmonkey2.jpg
I love it, you need to make more!

[CorpusBlack]

I love it, you need to make more!

I've got some other ideas. Just have to find time between projects at work or between my many projects at home. I made a more vulgar version but it's a bit too hard for the Hype.

[MaskedManJRK]

I've got some other ideas. Just have to find time between projects at work or between my many projects at home. I made a more vulgar version but it's a bit too hard for the Hype.

That, good sir, is why we have PMs. :woot:

[CorpusBlack]

Met Neal Boortz and Shawn Hannity last night. Well, I just shook their hands after they signed my FairTax books. Not sure, why Hannity signed them. :huh:

On a side note: while I was at Books-A-Million, I tried to buy a copy of this months issue of 'Batman Confidential' but the line was too long. There were well over 1000 people behind me at the book signing as I was leaving. :up:

Boortz also made a comment about some doctor switching human testicles with goat testicles. I missed the gist of it because people had crying kids all over that place. :mad:

[SuBe]

Met Neal Boortz and Shawn Hannity last night. Well, I just shook their hands after they signed my FairTax books. Not sure, why Hannity signed them. :huh:

On a side note: while I was at Books-A-Million, I tried to buy a copy of this months issue of 'Batman Confidential' but the line was too long. There were well over 1000 people behind me at the book signing as I was leaving. :up:

Boortz also made a comment about some doctor switching human testicles with goat testicles. I missed the gist of it because people had crying kids all over that place. :mad:
That would have been really cool to meet them. I met Neal back in 2005 when the first book came out. Sorry for your expirence with the Crying kids.

I'm glad to see so many people went!

[Malice]

OK...I am now trying to get my fingers wrapped around the Fair Tax...
Essentially its a Sales Tax...and part of the bill gets rid of a bunch of other taxes, correct?

[Malice]

I just ordered both Fairtax books to read them

[CorpusBlack]

I just ordered both Fairtax books to read them

Boortz said that John Linder is meeting w/ the Ukraine, as they are pretty adament on adopting the FairTax. Boortz said that America can't let another country adopt it before us. We've got to be the trend setter. :up:

[SuBe]

OK...I am now trying to get my fingers wrapped around the Fair Tax...
Essentially its a Sales Tax...and part of the bill gets rid of a bunch of other taxes, correct?

Yes, it gets rid of ALL Federal Taxes, and replaces them with a National Sales Tax on new goods and services, plus a Prebate check that would be send or Direct Deposited to every Head of House hold that would cover the Tax Liability on every purchase up to the Poverty level. The rest of the discussion is the logical reasoning to why this would work over our current system.

I just ordered both Fairtax books to read them

Great! I'm am very happy to hear that! Please tell me what you think when you read through them!:yay:

[Malice]

I dont understand the Prebate aspect to it so far...

[SuBe]

Boortz said that John Linder is meeting w/ the Ukraine, as they are pretty adament on adopting the FairTax. Boortz said that America can't let another country adopt it before us. We've got to be the trend setter. :up:
Agreed, if any other country adopts the FairTax before us, that would entice Corporations to move to that country, taking away jobs from here. That would put us at a disavantage when we do pass the FairTax, because we would be playing catchup, trying to get their business here. Plus, by then, there would be little insentive to move after setting up shop in a tax haven.

[CorpusBlack]

Agreed, if any other country adopts the FairTax before us, that would entice Corporations to move to that country, taking away jobs from here. That would put us at a disavantage when we do pass the FairTax, because we would be playing catchup, trying to get their business here. Plus, by then, there would be little insentive to move after setting up shop in a tax haven.

F'n Ukraine. :cmad: We had the idea first.

[SuBe]

I dont understand the Prebate aspect to it so far...
The thought of the Prebate is probably the most confusing part of the FairTax Plan. Essentially the Founders of the FairTax believes that you shouldn't have to pay the Government just to live, yet it should be fair and Progressive, just like our current tax code proports to be. Under our current tax code, People under the Poverty Line are not taxed on Income. Yet still pay the Embedded Taxes on all Goods and Services they currently Comsume. The Prebate would UNTAX Everything up to the Poverty line, which is determined by a Quarterly Report written by the Dept of Health and Human Services. This Report has all kinds of information like Job Growth, Tax Compliance, Ect.

The Prebate "prefunds" you what the national average is for the Tax Liability on Food and Necessities up to the Poverty Level. This Prebate is determined by how many Dependants you have, not how much money you make.
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m38/Spacemonkey3434/FTRebate.png

[CorpusBlack]

The thought of the Prebate is probably the most confusing part of the FairTax Plan. Essentially the Founders of the FairTax believes that you shouldn't have to pay the Government just to live, yet it should be fair and Progressive, just like our current tax code proports to be. Under our current tax code, People under the Poverty Line are not taxed on Income. Yet still pay the Embedded Taxes on all Goods and Services they currently Comsume. The Prebate would UNTAX Everything up to the Poverty line, which is determined by a Quarterly Report written by the Dept of Health and Human Services. This Report has all kinds of information like Job Growth, Tax Compliance, Ect.

The Prebate "prefunds" you what the national average is for the Tax Liability on Food and Necessities up to the Poverty Level. This Prebate is determined by how many Dependants you have, not how much money you make.
http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m38/Spacemonkey3434/FTRebate.png

As much as I love the FairTax, this is what charts and graphs make me do..

http://www.creativematch.co.uk/newsfiles/gun_head.gif

[Malice]

i still am lost on prebate...

[SuBe]

i still am lost on prebate...
Instead of Untaxing the Foods and Necessities, which would create a Lobbyist Enviroment, The Prebate "refunds" the Taxes you would pay on Food and Necessities up to the Poverty Level. The Dept of Health and Human Services state that the Poverty Level is about $10,000 a year earnings, if you spent $10,000 a year and 23% was taxed, that would be $2,300 a year. The Government would re-imberse you for your tax liability on Food and Necessities. But, the Bigger your household, the more you spend on Food. So, the bigger your household the bigger the Prebate.

[CorpusBlack]

i still am lost on prebate...

In a nutshell, the govt. sends the head of household money to cover food and other necessities. It's like a monthly bonus. The amount is determined by how many people live under your roof (see chart). It is direct deposited into your bank account. You are allowed to use the money any way you see fit. So take the prebate and buy comics if you want. :up:

[SuBe]

Also, the nice thing about the Prebate is that the Poverty Level is determined 4 times a year, and adjusts for inflation, where as anything that would "eleviate" tax pressure with our current tax code is required Congress to set, which only makes our tax code larger.

[Malice]

Instead of Untaxing the Foods and Necessities, which would create a Lobbyist Enviroment, The Prebate "refunds" the Taxes you would pay on Food and Necessities up to the Poverty Level. The Dept of Health and Human Services state that the Poverty Level is about $10,000 a year earnings, if you spent $10,000 a year and 23% was taxed, that would be $2,300 a year. The Government would re-imberse you for your tax liability on Food and Necessities. But, the Bigger your household, the more you spend on Food. So, the bigger your household the bigger the Prebate.

OK...so we pay all the taxes on consumable goods, and based on my household...1 couple, I would get a monthly check to my account for $391.

Is this correct?

[SuBe]

OK...so we pay all the taxes on consumable goods, and based on my household...1 couple, I would get a monthly check to my account for $391.

Is this correct?
Yes, that is correct.

Pros:
-Government doesn't look into your Finances
-This is given to every house hold, and based on SSN registered
-Entices Illegal Aliens to come in the Legal Way (as they wouldn't get the Prebate)
-Gets Government out of Corporations' Business, and not playing favorites
-You do not pay the Government just to live
-Get's rid of Lobbyists in the Tax Code

Cons:
-?

[Malice]

Yes, that is correct.

Pros:
-Government doesn't look into your Finances
-This is given to every house hold, and based on SSN registered
-Entices Illegal Aliens to come in the Legal Way (as they wouldn't get the Prebate)
-Gets Government out of Corporations' Business, and not playing favorites
-You do not pay the Government just to live
-Get's rid of Lobbyists in the Tax Code

Cons:
-?

What about fake SSN's....people using them in multiple locations...this would really need a little help in this process.

So is the sales tax percentage 23% that they want to charge?

[Superman4ever]

I found this article interesting. It's written by Bruce Bartlett who was deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury for economic policy.

What's foul about the FairTax
By Bruce Bartlett
January 5, 2008

FORMER ARKANSAS GOVERNOR Mike Huckabee's rise to the top tier of Republican presidential candidates is one of the major stories of this election cycle. Although his strong support among evangelical Christians is a factor in his rise, Huckabee has also benefited from the backing of a small but intense group of people favoring abolition of the federal tax system and its replacement by a 23 percent national retail sales tax known as the FairTax.
more stories like this

The states would be required to collect this new tax, thus allowing for abolition of the Internal Revenue Service. To prevent poor and middle-class people from being overly burdened, Americans would be sent monthly checks as a partial rebate of the tax.

Unfortunately, like all things in life that are too good to be true, so is this one. Here are a few problems with the FairTax.

True rate. When people hear about a 23 percent national sales tax, they naturally equate it to the state sales taxes they are familiar with. If a state sales tax is 5 percent, then this means that if someone buys something for $1 they will pay $1.05 at the checkout. Thus they assume that the FairTax would cause a $1 product to cost $1.23 if it were to be enacted.

In fact, the rate is not 23 percent, but 30 percent. The 23 percent rate is arrived at by treating the tax as if it were already part of the price instead of being on top. Thus if a product were to sell for $1 and the FairTax added 30 percent, the 30-cent tax comes to 23 percent of $1.30. This is how a 30 percent rate is deceptively turned into a 23 percent rate.

Governments must also pay. The FairTax would apply to all government purchases at every level. Only education spending is exempted.

States would have to pay 30 percent more on every highway and bridge they build, local governments would have to pay 30 percent more for police and fire protection, and even the federal government would have to pay the tax to itself when it buys weapons and ammunition for troops.

Taxes would have to be increased at the state and local level to pay the FairTax to the federal government. The FairTax rate would also have to be higher to pay for the additional federal spending it will require. However, FairTax supporters exclude this higher spending from their calculations. The 23 percent rate is designed only to be revenue-neutral, not spending neutral. Thus the federal deficit would either rise by more than $200 billion per year or spending would have to be cut by this much.

Rebate problems. The FairTax rebate would also add $600 billion to federal spending annually. Although its supporters say it is just like the one we get when our tax withholding exceeds the taxes we pay on our tax returns, the FairTax rebate is more like Social Security because it comes in a monthly check.

Although FairTax supporters tout the generosity of the rebate, it is extremely modest because it is based on the poverty level income - a figure that bears no relationship to the actual cost of living. As a consequence of the way the poverty rate is calculated, childless couples would get a monthly rebate of $391 per month, but a single mother with two children would only get $329 per month.

Prices will rise. Finally, FairTax supporters assume away many of the problems with their plan by asserting that prices will fall by 22 percent once all income taxes are abolished. Prices at the checkout would be about the same with the FairTax as they are now, they say, but everyone would come out ahead because their net wage will now equal their gross wage.

If this were so, it's hard to see why the rebate is needed, since there seems to be only winners and no losers under the FairTax. In reality, for prices to fall by 22 percent, business costs would also have to fall by 22 percent, which means that all workers would have to take a 22 percent pay cut.

It's unlikely that workers would agree to this. It is far more likely that the FairTax will raise the price of everything by 30 percent. This has been the case in every country and every state with a sales tax. The idea that prices will fall is just a pipe dream.

The FairTax is unworkable. It is a fantasy to think otherwise.

Bruce Bartlett was deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury for economic policy from 1988 to 1993.


Again, economists (from Bush's Advisory panel to Ive league institutions) are having difficulty trying to make this FraudTax work under real-world circumstances (removing all fairytale assumptions), below 30%.

Who to believe economic theorists or 2-3 very adamant internet posters?

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/01/05/whats_foul_about_the_fairtax/

[Malice]

This seems honestly like a great deal...I think its reality that is really the thing getting in the way now.

[Malice]

yeah I just read it...I like the idea, but yea, all prices will jump, because everything is taxed...

[SuBe]

What about fake SSN's....people using them in multiple locations...this would really need a little help in this process.

So is the sales tax percentage 23% that they want to charge?
The SSN are verified through the government when you get your first job, any child that is added must be registered through your SSN. The Government would verify that your Child's SSN matchs yours. So on and So forth. No duplicates can occur, or then there is an investigation, and usually you'll find that the Fake one loses out.

Yes, the Nation Sale Tax Rate would be set at 23% Inclusive. There have been many many Studies that show the the Average Embedded Taxes on the Price of Goods and Services are at between 20-22%, the Rest of the Revenue received by the IRS is that 3-1% is actually Income Taxes. So, you create an Average, then it is 23%. This is spread across the Board and Revenue Neutral.

[CorpusBlack]

I found this article interesting. It's written by Bruce Bartlett who was deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury for economic policy.



Again, economists (from Bush's Advisory panel to Ive league institutions) are having difficulty trying to make this FraudTax work under real-world circumstances (removing all fairytale assumptions), below 30%.

Who to believe economic theorists or 2-3 very adamant internet posters?

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/01/05/whats_foul_about_the_fairtax/

Every argument in that article has already been presented and addressed in this thread.

And it's a PREbate not a REbate.

[SuBe]

yeah I just read it...I like the idea, but yea, all prices will jump, because everything is taxed...
Prices effectively will remain the Same, give or take a few Pennies. Remember, after the Removal of the Embedded Prices and their Effects on the Price of the Finished goods, then add on top the FairTax, the Prices will remain the Same, only your Paycheck would not have anymore Withholdings, and you get the Prebate.

[Superman4ever]

Every argument in that article has already been presented and addressed in this thread.

And it's a PREbate not a REbate.

Then email the author of the article for his mistake!

[SuBe]

Then email the author of the article for his mistake!
He has already been emailed by Countless FairTax Proponents, plus there are a ton of Comments on the TownHall.com Forums Site.

Not only is Bruce Bartlet's Comments are corrected in this thread here are more:

http://www.fairtax.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1541&page=NewsArticle&id=8282
http://www.fairtax.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1541&page=NewsArticle&id=8645


And here is a Rebuttal for the Presidents Tax Commission:

http://www.fairtax.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1541&page=NewsArticle&id=8263

Not only that, but you can find the Truth by Reading the FairTax Book and the Sequel Book, FairTax: The Truth answering the Critics. There's plenty of misinformation out there. And that is even in the FairTax Book. There's a whole chapter about how it is easy to demagouge. But, if you have any specific questions about it, I'll be happy to answer them.

[CorpusBlack]

Then email the author of the article for his mistake!

If he was too careless in his research or writing it with his own agenda in mind, I doubt sending him an e-mail would make much difference and honestly I don't care. There is misinformation on the FairTax everywhere one looks. Life's a little too busy for me to correct every tidbit of uninformed rhetoric. I simply suggest that the author and you read this..

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Pc7a1V-kL._SS500_.jpg

If there is any concern that is not covered in the book, I'm sure SuBe or myself would be willing to answer it.

BTW, I like the exclamation at the end of your post. That was really intense. You're hardcore bro. :up:

[SuBe]

I found this article interesting. It's written by Bruce Bartlett who was deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury for economic policy.



Again, economists (from Bush's Advisory panel to Ive league institutions) are having difficulty trying to make this FraudTax work under real-world circumstances (removing all fairytale assumptions), below 30%.

Who to believe economic theorists or 2-3 very adamant internet posters?

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/01/05/whats_foul_about_the_fairtax/
Here is an Open letter from 80, yes EIGHT ZERO, economists that support the FairTax:

An Open Letter to the President, the Congress, and the American people
Concerning Reform of the Federal Tax Code

Dear Mr. President, Members of Congress, and Fellow Americans,

We, the undersigned business and university economists, welcome and applaud the ongoing initiative to reform the federal tax code. We urge the President and the Congress to work together in good faith to pass and sign into federal law H.R. 25 and S. 1025, which together call for:

Eliminating all federal income taxes for individuals and corporations,
Eliminating all federal payroll withholding taxes,
Abolishing estate and capital gains taxes, and
Repealing the 16th AmendmentWe are not calling for elimination of federal taxation, which would be irresponsible and undesirable. Nor does our endorsement call for reduced federal spending. The tax reform plan we endorse is revenue neutral, collecting as much federal tax revenue as the current income tax code, including payroll withholding taxes.
We are calling for elimination of federal income taxes and federal payroll withholding taxes. We endorse replacing these costly, oppressively complex, and economically inefficient taxes with a progressive national retail sales tax, such as the tax plan offered by H.R. 25 and S. 1025 which is also known as the FairTax Plan. The FairTax Plan has been introduced in the 110th Congress and had 61 co-sponsors in the 109th Congress.
If passed and signed into law, the FairTax Plan would:

Enable workers and retirees to receive 100% of their paychecks and pension benefits,
Replace all federal income and payroll taxes with a simple, progressive, visible, efficiently collected national retail sales tax, which would be levied on the final sale of newly produced goods and services,
Rebate to all households each month the federal sales tax they pay on basic necessities, up to an independently determined level of spending (a.k.a., the poverty level, as determined by the Department of Health and Human Services), which removes the burden of federal taxation on the poor and makes the FairTax Plan as progressive as the current tax code,
Collect the national sales tax at the retail cash register, just as 45 states already do,
Set a federal sales tax rate that is revenue neutral, thereby raising the same amount of tax revenue as now raised by federal income taxes plus payroll withholding taxes,
Continue Social Security and Medicare benefits as provided by law; only the means of tax collection changes,
Eliminate all filing of individual federal tax returns,
Eliminate the IRS and all audits of individual taxpayers; only audits of retailers would be needed, greatly reducing the cost of enforcing the federal tax code,
Allow states the option of collecting the national retail sales tax, in return for a fee, along with their state and local sales taxes,
Collect federal sales tax from every retail consumer in the country, whether citizen or undocumented alien, which will enlarge the federal tax base,
Collect federal sales tax on all consumption spending on new final goods and services, whether the dollars used to finance the spending are generated legally, illegally, or in the huge “underground economy,”
Dramatically reduce federal tax compliance costs paid by businesses, which are now embedded and hidden in retail prices, placing U.S. businesses at a disadvantage in world markets,
Bring greater accountability and visibility to federal tax collection,
Attract foreign equity investment to the United States, as well as encourage U.S. firms to locate new capital projects in the United States that might otherwise go abroad, and
Not tax spending for education, since H.R. 25 and S. 1025 define expenditure on education to be investment, not consumption, which will make education about half as expensive for American families as it is now.The current U.S. income tax code is widely regarded by just about everyone as unfair, complex, wasteful, confusing, and costly. Businesses and other organizations spend more than six billion hours each year complying with the federal tax code. Estimated compliance costs conservatively top $225 billion annually costs that are ultimately embedded in retail prices paid by consumers.
The Internal Revenue Code cannot simply be “fixed,” which is amply demonstrated by more than 35 years of attempted tax code reform, each round resulting in yet more complexity and unrelenting, page-after-page, mind-numbing verbiage (now exceeding 54,000 pages containing more than 2.8 million words).
Our nation’s current income tax alters business decisions in ways that limit growth in productivity. The federal income tax also alters saving and investment decisions of households, which dramatically reduces the economy’s potential for growth and job creation.
Payroll withholding taxes are regressive, hitting hardest those least able to pay. Simply stated, the complexity and frequently changing rules of the federal income tax code make our country less competitive in the global economy and rob the nation of its full potential for growth and job creation.
In summary, the economic benefits of the FairTax Plan are compelling. The FairTax Plan eliminates the tax bias against work, saving, and investment, which would lead to higher rates of economic growth, faster growth in productivity, more jobs, lower interest rates, and a higher standard of living for the American people.
The America proposed by the FairTax Plan would feature:

no federal income taxes,
no payroll taxes,
no self-employment taxes,
no capital gains taxes,
no gift or estate taxes,
no alternative minimum taxes,
no corporate taxes,
no payroll withholding,
no taxes on Social Security benefits or pension benefits,
no personal tax forms,
no personal or business income tax record keeping, and
no personal income tax filing whatsoever.No Internal Revenue Service; no April 15th; all gone, forever.
We believe that many Americans will favor the FairTax Plan proposed by H.R. 25 and S. 1025, although some may say, “it simply can’t be done.” Many said the same thing to the grassroots progressives who won women the right to vote, to those who made collective bargaining a reality for union members, and to the Freedom Riders who made civil rights a reality in America.
We urge Congress not to abandon the FairTax Plan simply because it will be difficult to face the objections of entrenched special interest groups who now benefit from the complexity and tax preferences of the status quo. The comparative advantage and benefits offered by the FairTax Plan to the vast majority of Americans is simply too high a cost to pay.
Therefore, we the undersigned professional and university economists, endorse a progressive national retail sales tax plan, as provided by the FairTax Plan. We urge Congress to make H.R. 25 and S. 1025 federal law, and then to work swiftly to repeal the 16th Amendment.
Respectfully,
Donald L. Alexander
Professor of Economics
Western Michigan University John Greenhut, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Finance & Business Economics
School of Global Management and Leadership
Arizona State University Ben Pierce
Central Missouri State UniversityWayne Angell
Angell Economics Darrin V. Gulla
Dept. of Economics
University of Georgia Michael K. Pippenger, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Economics
University of AlaskaJim Araji
Professor of Agricultural Economics
University of Idaho Jon Halvorson
Assistant Professor of Economics
Indiana University of Pennsylvania Robert Piron
Professor of Economics
Oberlin CollegeRay Ball
Graduate School of Business
University of Chicago Reza G. Hamzaee, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics &
Applied Decision Sciences
Department of Economics
Missouri Western State College Mattias Polborn
Department of Economics
University of IllinoisRoger J. Beck
Professor Emeritus
Southern Illinois University, Carbondale James M. Hvidding
Professor of Economics
Kutztown University Joseph S. Pomykala, Ph.D.
Department of Economics
Towson University John J. Bethune
Kennedy Chair of Free Enterprise
Barton College F. Jerry Ingram, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics and Finance
The University of Louisiana-Monroe Barry Popkin
University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill David M. Brasington
Louisiana State UniversityDrew Johnson
Fellow
Davenport Institute for Public Policy
Pepperdine UniversitySteven W. Rick
Lecturer, University of Wisconsin
Senior Economist, Credit Union National Association Jack A. Chambless
Professor of Economics
Valencia College Steven J. Jordan
Visiting Assistant Professor
Virginia Tech
Department of Economics Paul H. Rubin
Samuel Candler Dobbs
Professor of Economics & Law
Department of Economics
Emory University Christopher K. Coombs
Louisiana State University Richard E. Just
University of Maryland John Ruggiero
University of Dayton William J. Corcoran, Ph.D.
University of Nebraska
at OmahaDr. Michael S. Kaylen
Associate Professor
University of Missouri Michael K. Salemi
Bowman and Gordon Gray
Professor of Economics
University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill Eleanor D. Craig
Economics Department
University of DelawareDavid L. Kendall
Professor of Economics and Finance
University of Virginia's College at WiseDr. Carole E. Scott
Richards College of Business
State University of West Georgia Susan Dadres, Ph.D.
Department of Economics
Southern Methodist University Peter M. Kerr
Professor of Economics
Southeast Missouri State UniversityCarlos Seiglie
Dept. of Economics
Rutgers University Henry Demmert
Santa Clara University Miles Spencer Kimball
Professor of Economics
University of MichiganJohn Semmens
Economist
Phoenix College
Arizona Arthur De Vany
Professor Emeritus
Economics and Mathematical Behavioral Sciences
University of California, Irvine James V. Koch
Department of Economics
Old Dominion University Alan C. Shapiro
Ivadelle and Theodore Johnson
Professor of Banking and Finance
Marshall School of Business
University of Southern California Pradeep Dubey
Leading Professor
Center for Game Theory
Dept. of Economics
SUNY at Stony Brook Laurence J. Kotlikoff
Professor of Economics
Boston University Dr. Stephen Shmanske
Professor of Economics
California State University,
Hayward Demissew Diro Ejara
William Paterson University of New Jersey Edward J. López
Assistant Professor
University of North Texas James F. Smith
University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill Patricia J. Euzent
Department of Economics
University of Central Florida Franklin Lopez
Tulane UniversityVernon L. Smith
Economist John A. Flanders
Professor of Business and Economics
Central Methodist University Salvador Lopez
University of West Georgia W. James Smith
Dean of Liberal Arts and Sciences and Professor of Economics
University of Colorado at Denver Richard H. Fosberg, Ph.D.
William Paterson University Yuri N. Maltsev, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
Carthage College John C. Soper
Boler School of Business
John Carroll University Gary L. French, Ph.D.
Senior Vice President
Nathan Associates Inc. Glenn MacDonald
John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics and Strategy
Washington University in St. Louis Roger Spencer
Professor of Economics
Trinity UniversityProfessor James Frew
Economics Department
Willamette University Dr. John Merrifield
Professor of Economics
University of Texas-San AntonioDaniel A. Sumner, Director,
University of California
Agricultural Issues Center
and the Frank H. Buck, Jr.,
Chair Professor,
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics,
University of California, DavisK. K. Fung
University of MemphisDr. Matt Metzgar
Mount Union College Curtis R. Taylor
Professor of Economics and Business
Duke UniversitySatya J. Gabriel, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics and Finance
Mount Holyoke College Carlisle Moody
Department of Economics
College of William and MaryRobert Vigil
Analysis Group, Inc. Dave Garthoff
Summit College
The University of Akron Andrew P. Morriss
Galen J. Roush Professor of Business Law & Regulation
Case Western Reserve University School of Law John H. Wicks, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
Department of Economics
University of Montana Ronald D. Gilbert
Associate Professor of Economics
Texas Tech University Timothy Perri
Department of Economics
Appalachian State University F. Scott Wilson, Ph.D.
Canisius CollegePhilip E. Graves
Department of Economics
University of Colorado Mark J. Perry
School of Management and Department of Economics
University of Michigan-FlintMokhlis Y. Zaki
Professor of Economics Emeritus
Northern Michigan University Bettina Bien Greaves, Retired
Foundation for Economic EducationTimothy Peterson
Assistant Professor
Economics and Management Department
Gustavus Adolphus College

[Malice]

I have had one question...not a criticism, but a concern.
What happens to all the people employed by the system of Taxes...
IRS people...H&R Block...you know....all those groups..

Just an interesting thought, since 90% of them would no longer be needed.

[The Senator]

Question on the prebate:

If I'm living with my boyfriend, does that count as a two-adult household? If not, can we both apply separately for a prebate? Or is there no way we can receive a prebate for two people if we live together?

[SuBe]

I have had one question...not a criticism, but a concern.
What happens to all the people employed by the system of Taxes...
IRS people...H&R Block...you know....all those groups..

Just an interesting thought, since 90% of them would no longer be needed.
Part in Part, sorry. The a top executive at H&R block has said that the company actually have a higher profit yeild in Investments than Tax Services, and under the FairTax, the system is set up to help people invest their money, so they have no concern about it. IRS people could always use their College educations to get themselves an accounting job, because IRS actually would look good on a Resume. Infact the AICPA supports the FairTax. With the IRS there are roughly 10,000 people working there, and 299,990,000 people not working there. And they would get the benifits with the FairTax too. So, it's not that bad.

[Malice]

Question on the prebate:

If I'm living with my boyfriend, does that count as a two-adult household? If not, can we both apply separately for a prebate? Or is there no way we can receive a prebate for two people if we live together?

I would imagine you each get a prebate check

[Malice]

Part in Part, sorry. The a top executive at H&R block has said that the company actually have a higher profit yeild in Investments than Tax Services, and under the FairTax, the system is set up to help people invest their money, so they have no concern about it. IRS people could always use their College educations to get themselves an accounting job, because IRS actually would look good on a Resume. Infact the AICPA supports the FairTax. With the IRS there are roughly 10,000 people working there, and 299,990,000 people not working there. And they would get the benifits with the FairTax too. So, it's not that bad.

I was just curious...I always was thinking about how many people would loose jobs because of it..

[SuBe]

Question on the prebate:

If I'm living with my boyfriend, does that count as a two-adult household? If not, can we both apply separately for a prebate? Or is there no way we can receive a prebate for two people if we live together?
You would be able to get it individually. Just like with my Girlfriend and I. If you could claim him as a dependant (which I don't know if you could today) then you both would be shy by $0.50 each. So, it's just better to get it individually. If you happen to adopt a child, then I think that only one of you can claim him. Remember, under the FairTax it doesn't matter how much you make, only how many people you claim.

[SuBe]

I was just curious...I always was thinking about how many people would loose jobs because of it..
They might lose a job temporarily, but with the influx of new jobs due to the increased economy and Foreign Businesses moving to US Shores, they are expecting more jobs than people that could work them. It wouldn't be bad for the former IRS agents, they'll be able to find a job easily.

[Malice]

They might lose a job temporarily, but with the influx of new jobs due to the increased economy and Foreign Businesses moving to US Shores, they are expecting more jobs than people that could work them. It wouldn't be bad for the former IRS agents, they'll be able to find a job easily.

We can only hope...

[SuBe]

We can only hope...
Google: Irish Miracle or Celtic Tiger. You will see that Ireland did something similar. They reduced their Corporate Taxes to the Lowest in the Industrilized world, and their Economy Exploded in the early 90's.

[Handsome Rob]

INCLUSIVE vs. EXCLUSIVE Tax Rates

Are you ready for a magic show? I'm going to show you how two different tax rates can be determined from the EXACT same numbers. And, the rate is solely based on the calculation method you use. See, I've seen people argue that the FairTax lies when it talks about 23%--that the FairTax authors are intentionally lying to the public to make the FairTax more palatable and that it's really more like 30%. But, it's both 23% and 30%. What? Yeah . . . that's right. Let's have fun with numbers:

The sales tax rate in my county in Tennessee is officially 9.25%. This rate is known as the exclusive rate. When I purchase an item for $1.00, I pay $1.0925. Here's the formula: $1.0925 = [$1.00 * (1+.0925)].

But, what if we were to take the same numbers and calculate the inclusive tax rate? In order to do that, we take the item before tax and divide it by the item after the tax rate. ($1.00 / $1.0925) = .9153. This is the percentage of the total amount paid that relates to the item itself and not the taxes. So, when I buy an item for $1.0925, 91.53% of what I pay is for the actual item itself. And, if 91.53% is that percentage, then the remainder must be the percentage that I pay that is tax. 1 - .9153 = .0847 (or 8.47%).

Cost of Item: $1.00, Cost + Sales Tax: $1.0925

Results:
Exclusive tax rate: 9.25% (the "30%" tax rate the naysayers insist the FairTax is)
Inclusive tax rate: 8.47% (the "23%" tax rate the FairTax people push--which the naysayers insist is a "lie")

Regardless of whether the exclusive tax rate or inclusive tax rate is used, the amount paid is still the same. My buying power is still the same. I have no less money under the exclusive rate than I do under the inclusive one. I pay the same amount of money in taxes. Inclusive and Exclusive are TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN.

The reason why the FairTax founders use the Inclusive tax rate in their calculations is because the income tax is an inclusive tax. They actually cover this very topic in the FairTax book, if memory serves me right.

So, before the 30% folks go insisting that the 23% folks are lying, they should at least try to understand how the 30% and the 23% figures are derived.

[SuBe]

INCLUSIVE vs. EXCLUSIVE Tax Rates

Are you ready for a magic show? I'm going to show you how two different tax rates can be determined from the EXACT same numbers. And, the rate is solely based on the calculation method you use. See, I've seen people argue that the FairTax lies when it talks about 23%--that the FairTax authors are intentionally lying to the public to make the FairTax more palatable and that it's really more like 30%. But, it's both 23% and 30%. What? Yeah . . . that's right. Let's have fun with numbers:

The sales tax rate in my county in Tennessee is officially 9.25%. This rate is known as the exclusive rate. When I purchase an item for $1.00, I pay $1.0925. Here's the formula: $1.0925 = [$1.00 * (1+.0925)].

But, what if we were to take the same numbers and calculate the inclusive tax rate? In order to do that, we take the item before tax and divide it by the item after the tax rate. ($1.00 / $1.0925) = .9153. This is the percentage of the total amount paid that relates to the item itself and not the taxes. So, when I buy an item for $1.0925, 91.53% of what I pay is for the actual item itself. And, if 91.53% is that percentage, then the remainder must be the percentage that I pay that is tax. 1 - .9153 = .0847 (or 8.47%).

Cost of Item: $1.00, Cost + Sales Tax: $1.0925

Results:
Exclusive tax rate: 9.25% (the "30%" tax rate the naysayers insist the FairTax is)
Inclusive tax rate: 8.47% (the "23%" tax rate the FairTax people push--which the naysayers insist is a "lie")

Regardless of whether the exclusive tax rate or inclusive tax rate is used, the amount paid is still the same. My buying power is still the same. I have no less money under the exclusive rate than I do under the inclusive one. I pay the same amount of money in taxes. Inclusive and Exclusive are TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN.

The reason why the FairTax founders use the Inclusive tax rate in their calculations is because the income tax is an inclusive tax. They actually cover this very topic in the FairTax book, if memory serves me right.

So, before the 30% folks go insisting that the 23% folks are lying, they should at least try to understand how the 30% and the 23% figures are derived.
Yup, I have several Posts about that same thing. 23 or 30, it is the same thing.

Just like my football anology, is it 100 yards or 300 feet? SAME THING. But of course the bigger number scares people.

[CorpusBlack]

Man, I'm tired of seeing people dropping the same arguments over and over. No offense to anyone in particular but at least read through the thread. I know a lot of you are just hating on the idea of the FairTax, but at least know what you are talking about and stop posting various articles from writers with either their own political agenda (most likely via lobbyist pressure) or fueled by misinformation. The FairTax is not a Republican or a Democrat thing, it's an everyone thing. In actuality, SuBe and I have very different views on politics but still see eye to eye on this issue.

I know the vast majority of you don't agree with SupermanBeyond and myself, which I think is just spawned from being annoyed by our enthusiasm about it, but I implore you all to really research it and understand it from all angles. Go ahead and read the critics’ viewpoint but also read articles and books by those who support it. The new Neal Boortz book ‘FairTax: The Truth - Answering The Critics’ will answer every possible criticism. If it doesn’t, SuBe or I will try and answer it for you.

Try to be impartial and form your own opinion. Don’t be swayed just because your favorite politician is opposed to the idea. They are either misinformed or don’t want this to pass, as it would take lobbyist kickbacks away from them. Not to mention, that the FairTax brings more power to the people and most politicians definitely don’t want that. Also, don’t be swayed just because you are sick of SuBe and myself pimping the bejesus out of the idea. We’re just excited and passionate about it.

Most of you think it’s too good to be true and fantasy. All I’m going to say, is that you all should seriously look into it and try to be unbiased in the process. I was incredibly skeptical about it too. However, the more I read about, the more I realize that this is a great thing. Will it ever happen, I honestly don’t know but I hope that it does.

I know there are those of you who will not look at it impartially and just continue to whine about our love of the FairTax. So keep trying to drop your asinine criticisms on us and we’ll keep serving your ass the truth. ;)

You’re only making yourselves look like asses by repeatedly presenting the same arguments umpteen times. :oldrazz:

[SuBe]

:yay: I agree with you 100%. CB.

Superman4ever posted the Bruce Bartlet Collumn, I've already answered the criticisms on that. And a couple of other Collumns by him. If you want to criticize the FairTax, please know what you are talking about, Actually read the thread. But, if you don't want to just post collumns you copied on the internet and really want to learn about it. PLEASE ASK ANY QUESTION ABOUT THE FAIRTAX. I will answer it or spend time and research the issue for you.

The FairTax is the most important issue we have. This is a transfer of power unlike anything that has happened in this country since the Revolutionary War, and the Constitution was written. This puts FEAR in the Politicians, they don't know what to do to get elected if they can't divide the tax base anymore. They all have their own agendas, they want to keep the Current tax code (developed by the government, no less) to keep their power over you. The FairTax was developed by people, just like you and me. Not the Government.

You know how in a Casino, the odds are in the House's Favor? That is the same thing with the Current Tax code, that is the Government's covuluted, burdensome attempt. The FairTax was written by the Private Sector. It completely 100% Revenue Neatural, ALL of your Government Programs will still be their. It just changes the way the Taxes are collected. This FairTax replaces over 65,000 pages of rules and regulations with only 132 pages.

Please everyone, read through the thread, as ALL questions are answered there, but if you have a specific question. Many Collumns have been posted, attacking the Idea, and I have just applied a little logic to it, and their arguement falls apart.

[Malice]

My Fairtax books should get here tomorrow.

[Malice]

I think the FairTax Sucks!
*just kidding....*
I will post more about it once I read the two books..

:)

[The Senator]

:yay: I agree with you 100%. CB.

Superman4ever posted the Bruce Bartlet Collumn, I've already answered the criticisms on that. And a couple of other Collumns by him. If you want to criticize the FairTax, please know what you are talking about.

Hahaha! For some reason, I actually laughed my ass off when I read that last line.

But seriously, I thank you SuBe for taking the time to answer my questions and help enlighten me and other posters on this. I will eventually read the FairTax book(s), and while I think this may be too good to be true, it certainly sounds appealing.

[SuBe]

Hahaha! For some reason, I actually laughed my ass off when I read that last line.

But seriously, I thank you SuBe for taking the time to answer my questions and help enlighten me and other posters on this. I will eventually read the FairTax book(s), and while I think this may be too good to be true, it certainly sounds appealing.
Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Initially, the FairTax seems "too good to be true". This Tax Plan was developed privately, not by the government, unlike our current Tax Code. This Tax Plan has Over $22 Million spent in research. And that is with Private Dollars. I believe that this is a plan that will Save the US economy. But, we have to enact this as soon as possible, if another country sets this up, then Corporations will move to that country and we lose Jobs.

[Malice]

Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Initially, the FairTax seems "too good to be true". This Tax Plan was developed privately, not by the government, unlike our current Tax Code. This Tax Plan has Over $22 Million spent in research. And that is with Private Dollars. I believe that this is a plan that will Save the US economy. But, we have to enact this as soon as possible, if another country sets this up, then Corporations will move to that country and we lose Jobs.

I will be the critic on this one...
Of course only my opinion counts
;)

Book should be here today or tomorrow I think

[CorpusBlack]

I will be the critic on this one...
Of course only my opinion counts
;)

Book should be here today or tomorrow I think

Awesome. The first book is a quick read. I still haven't entirely read the second. I've just skimmed over it, as people have raised questions that I needed to find answers for.

[SuBe]

Malice: How is the FairTax Book going for you? Have you read it yet?

[Malice]

Damnit! I JUST got shipped the second book...the first one has not Shipped yet!

ARG!

Is the second book ok to read without the first?

[CorpusBlack]

Damnit! I JUST got shipped the second book...the first one has not Shipped yet!

ARG!

Is the second book ok to read without the first?

I'd wait til the first comes in man. The second book just goes more in depth than the first by answering critics and concerns. The first book covers the whole basic outline of the tax plan, which IMO is a necessity in understanding before reading the second.

[Malice]

ok, thanks

[SuBe]

If anyone is interested, there is an online Seminar that launched today about the FairTax. You can go to http://www.visualwebcaster.com/event.asp?id=46446 to watch. I believe it is about an hour long, I won't get to watch it until after work. But, if any of you get to watch it, post your comments here.

Remember, if anyone has any questions about the FairTax, you can ask me.

EDIT: It starts at 1:00 pm today.

[CorpusBlack]

ok, thanks

How's the book thus far?

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

I haven't read through the entire thread so this may have been brought up already but if someone could clear this up for me I would appreciate it.

There is no written law that states citizens have to pay taxes is there?

[SuBe]

I haven't read through the entire thread so this may have been brought up already but if someone could clear this up for me I would appreciate it.

There is no written law that states citizens have to pay taxes is there?
From what I understand (which I would never do out of fear of an audit) is, Only Taxpayers pay income taxes, if you don't pay taxes, you don't have to pay income taxes. But, I'm not willing to fight the Imperial government over that. Are you?

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

I am just curious with my question. I skimmed some of this stuff in this thread but have yet had the time to really read everything.

Soo......

Supposedly only 1% of US citizens make $300,00 or more a year, so roughly 2.8 million citizens earn $300,000 or more a year or...at least $840,000,000,000. (Does this still hold true? Do we really know how many citizens make how much money each year? Millions vs. hundreds of thousands?)

[SuBe]

I am just curious with my question. I skimmed some of this stuff in this thread but have yet had the time to really read everything.

Soo......

Supposedly only 1% of US citizens make $300,00 or more a year, so roughly 2.8 million citizens earn $300,000 or more a year or...at least $840,000,000,000. (Does this still hold true? Do we really know how many citizens make how much money each year? Millions vs. hundreds of thousands?)
I not 100% sure what the question is, or at least what answer you want. But, I believe that Millions of People earn more than $300,000 a year, Hundreds of thousands earn Millions, Thousands earn Hundreds of Millions and and less than a hundred earn Billions.

I just heard that 17% of all Income Earners earn more than $100,000 a year. Yet that 17% of all Income Earners pay about 30% of all Income Taxes Collected. I'm sure to get the actual answer your are looking for, you can find out the Information at the IRS website.

What is really nice about the FairTax is, it doesn't tax you on what you earn. Remember, with all the Baby Boomers retiring soon, we are going to have MORE retired people in the US than Income Earners. So, where are all the Revenue going to come from? I can tell you, not the Retired. So, with over half the US population retiring, and an ever increasing Federal Government, they are going to have to increase the Tax Rate on every Income Earner or Increase the Tax Base. It's one or the other to keep the same amount of revenue. With the FairTax, they increase the Tax Base to Every Single Person within our Borders. Which means, every tourist, drug dealer, prostitute, illegal alien, and Citizen. And it taxes everyone equally based on your spending habits. If you can afford to buy a $200,000 Yacht, 23% of that $200,000 is going to be taxes, if you can only afford to buy a dvd for entertainment, you are only going to pay 23% in taxes on price of that DVD. Now, if you can only afford to Buy Food, the Prebate is going to reimburse you for your Tax Expenditure on that food. The Prebate guarentees that you will never pay taxes just to live. And everyone gets it. Unlike our current tax code.

If you have any other questions about the FairTax Plan, please ask.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

I will be back soon to discuss this further. But one small question I have is this....what politiciants/economist/scholars and the like support this idea?

Are there any countries currently implementing it?

[SuBe]

I will be back soon to discuss this further. But one small question I have is this....what politiciants/economist/scholars and the like support this idea?

Are there any countries currently implementing it?
Great Questions. The Bill (HR 25) has more sponsers/co-Sponsers than any other bill in Congress. http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_scorecard Check this website for your state representative's postition.

Many Economists support the FairTax. http://www.fairtax.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1541&page=NewsArticle&id=8351 This is an open letter signed by 80 economists. There have been many studies of the FairTax done by Both Harvard University and Boston University also. http://www.fairtax.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1501&page=NewsArticle&id=9638
http://www.fairtax.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1501&page=NewsArticle&id=9397

There is a lot more information on the FairTax.org website.

One thing that a lot of people don't understand is, all forms of Taxes from every country is propsed and implented by the Government, the FairTax would be the only Tax Code developed fully be Citizens instead of the Government. No Other Country currently uses the FairTax, but similar Tax Codes are out there, like in Ireland. They have the Lowest Corporate Tax Rate of any Industrialized Nation. Also, for you information, FairTax.org is the organization that developed this tax plan. They are not picking up the ball and running with it, they made it. They have 30+ years and $22 Million
invested in it. That is more than any other piece of Legislation in US history.

[CorpusBlack]

They have 30+ years and $22 Million
invested in it. That is more than any other piece of Legislation in US history.

Yet misinformed Hypesters want to keep sh-tting on it without looking into it for themselves.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

From what I understand (which I would never do out of fear of an audit) is, Only Taxpayers pay income taxes, if you don't pay taxes, you don't have to pay income taxes. But, I'm not willing to fight the Imperial government over that. Are you?

Well...not like I have the money to do so in the first place. I mean they could easily make something like that cost me hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars I don't have not to mention years of jail time and on and on and on. You know how the Govt. likes to work.

I was just curious because some of my co-workers and I had a talk the other day and wesley snipes came up. Apparently he is fighting the govt for not having paid any taxes for the last 10 years plus. I think his main argument is there is no law saying he has to.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Great Questions. The Bill (HR 25) has more sponsers/co-Sponsers than any other bill in Congress. http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_scorecard Check this website for your state representative's postition.

Many Economists support the FairTax. http://www.fairtax.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1541&page=NewsArticle&id=8351 This is an open letter signed by 80 economists. There have been many studies of the FairTax done by Both Harvard University and Boston University also. http://www.fairtax.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1501&page=NewsArticle&id=9638
http://www.fairtax.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1501&page=NewsArticle&id=9397

There is a lot more information on the FairTax.org website.

One thing that a lot of people don't understand is, all forms of Taxes from every country is propsed and implented by the Government, the FairTax would be the only Tax Code developed fully be Citizens instead of the Government. No Other Country currently uses the FairTax, but similar Tax Codes are out there, like in Ireland. They have the Lowest Corporate Tax Rate of any Industrialized Nation. Also, for you information, FairTax.org is the organization that developed this tax plan. They are not picking up the ball and running with it, they made it. They have 30+ years and $22 Million
invested in it. That is more than any other piece of Legislation in US history.

I have so many questions but they can probably be answered if I just read through this thread.

But...why no taxes for corporations? They do produce huge amounts of money.

[SuBe]

I have so many questions but they can probably be answered if I just read through this thread.

But...why no taxes for corporations? They do produce huge amounts of money.
Common Misconseption. If you owned a business, no matter how big or small, you have to "pay" taxes. What do you do to earn that money to "pay" those taxes? Increase the price of the goods or services you are selling to "pay" those taxes. So, essentially, you will increase the price of your goods, and collect your tax liability from your customers and pass it onto the Government. So, Businesses do not pay taxes, only collect them from Consumers, and pass them up. It is that way for every business, no matter how small.

[SuBe]

Malice:

Did you ever get to read your FairTax Books?

[Malice]

I got my books!
Granted I got some books before them.

I am reading right now
Get Out Of My House!

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Can this thread get a sticky?

[Malice]

no.

[SuBe]

Remember, if anyone has any questions, please post them. I will answer as quickly as possible.

And thank you all for making this Thread a success.

[Tron5000]

Remember, if anyone has any questions, please post them. I will answer as quickly as possible.

And thank you all for making this Thread a success.

SuBe, I'm in the middle of the new FairTax book and I find it very informative, as well as an exceptionally easy read. I just wish we could put copies of the books in the hands of all Americans and say, "Look, before you decide you don't like the idea of the FairTax, please take a weekend and read these 2 books and see if your opinion on the matter changes."

I know many people who disagree with me on the FairTax, but I believe I have yet to come across an individual who has read the books and still disagrees with the plan. Granted, most people who take the time to read the books likely have a proclivity toward agreeing with the concepts contained within, but I wish we could have like a required "Summer Reading List" for the whole country.

[SuBe]

SuBe, I'm in the middle of the new FairTax book and I find it very informative, as well as an exceptionally easy read. I just wish we could put copies of the books in the hands of all Americans and say, "Look, before you decide you don't like the idea of the FairTax, please take a weekend and read these 2 books and see if your opinion on the matter changes."

I know many people who disagree with me on the FairTax, but I believe I have yet to come across an individual who has read the books and still disagrees with the plan. Granted, most people who take the time to read the books likely have a proclivity toward agreeing with the concepts contained within, but I wish we could have like a required "Summer Reading List" for the whole country.
I know what you mean. I've spoken with plenty of people on here about the FairTax, and many more in real life. All I want to do is let people know that there is a better, simpler way. No Politics, just Americans taking back our Government.

Who Posted?Total Posts: 610User NamePostsSupermanBeyond (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=35814)227 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=35814&searchthreadid=290666)CorpusBlack (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=60220)72 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=60220&searchthreadid=290666)Mysterio (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=26179)71 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=26179&searchthreadid=290666)Mal'Akai (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=42355)36 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=42355&searchthreadid=290666)Lackey (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=1595)32 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=1595&searchthreadid=290666)Malice (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=1708)21 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=1708&searchthreadid=290666)zenile (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=53141)18 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=53141&searchthreadid=290666)Handsome Rob (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=61908)16 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=61908&searchthreadid=290666)Mr Sparkle (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=24951)13 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=24951&searchthreadid=290666)Ahura Mazda (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=12056)10 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=12056&searchthreadid=290666)jmanspice (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=18490)10 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=18490&searchthreadid=290666)keith_v (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=40542)9 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=40542&searchthreadid=290666)cookiva (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=32473)9 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=32473&searchthreadid=290666)Danalys (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=3706)7 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=3706&searchthreadid=290666)Spider-Bite (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=36479)6 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=36479&searchthreadid=290666)BAH HUMBBUG! (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=36141)6 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=36141&searchthreadid=290666)CK1 (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=26442)5 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=26442&searchthreadid=290666)Superman4ever (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=13466)5 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=13466&searchthreadid=290666)Prisoner 655321 (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=35571)4 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=35571&searchthreadid=290666)StorminNorman (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=33158)3 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=33158&searchthreadid=290666)Steve Rogers (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=57799)3 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=57799&searchthreadid=290666)Casey (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=17458)3 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=17458&searchthreadid=290666)fifthfiend (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=3783)3 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=3783&searchthreadid=290666)MadHatterJones (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=60558)3 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=60558&searchthreadid=290666)Mistress Gluon (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=42392)2 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=42392&searchthreadid=290666)hippie_hunter (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=14349)2 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=14349&searchthreadid=290666)CalebYourMaster (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=41035)2 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=41035&searchthreadid=290666)bell110 (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=58377)2 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=58377&searchthreadid=290666)Sandman138 (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=8791)2 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=8791&searchthreadid=290666)YsoSerious (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=60365)1 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=60365&searchthreadid=290666)MaskedManJRK (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=34570)1 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=34570&searchthreadid=290666)ActuallyRobin (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=58638)1 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=58638&searchthreadid=290666)Tron5000 (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=18910)1 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=18910&searchthreadid=290666)rdh007 (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=11052)1 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=11052&searchthreadid=290666)EdRyder (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=31705)1 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=31705&searchthreadid=290666)Kritish (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=30611)1 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=30611&searchthreadid=290666)terry78 (http://forums.superherohype.com/member.php?u=15942)1 (http://forums.superherohype.com/search.php?do=finduser&userid=15942&searchthreadid=290666)Show Thread & Close Window (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=290666)

Just look at who's posted here. Every one of the people that "disagrees" with the FairTax, lose their Arguement when you just apply simple logic to it.

Read through the Thread, see how long it's been since some people posted arguements and critisms here. Their Arguements don't hold water, and in the end, how is the FairTax ANY WORSE that what we have now?

The main reason people "disagree" with the FairTax is because they are either afraid of the change, or just don't believe that politicians would allow that. But, I'm sorry, I'm the Employer, politicians are the employee. And, we pay their salaries. Its time for Real Change, not this tennis match of Elections, but Real Change. It's time we learn that there are better oppurtunities out there, if we demand that change.

[SuBe]

Ron Paul supporters, FairTax advocates, and tax-reformers call for national protest
Monday, March 10, 2008
By: Al Everson

Claiming they are latter-day revolutionaries in the tradition of America's founders, some citizens are gearing up to protest what they consider unfair taxation.

Claiming they are latter-day revolutionaries in the tradition of America's founders, some citizens are gearing up to protest what they consider unfair taxation.

They are calling for a general strike next month.

In the wake of passage of a property-tax amendment to the Florida Constitution, Volusia Tax Reform and supporters of the Ron Paul for President campaign are joining grassroots movements to demand further tax reductions and an overhaul of the state and federal tax systems.

Paul's supporters are trying to mount a nationwide work stoppage April 15 — the deadline for filing 2007 federal income-tax returns — and rallies in the nation's capital and in cities and towns around the country.

"They're asking people to take the day off from work to show solidarity with the idea that our tax system is unfair across the board," said Maureen France, co-chair of Volusia Tax Reform's executive board and a former DeLand city commissioner.

David Schlemmer, an Orange City resident working for an Internet radio station promoting "the Ron Paul Revolution," said he is trying to organize the April 15 tax protest. He said one of the symbols of the protest will be a white armband.

"Back during the Roman Empire, that was a sign of unity when the slaves stood up," Schlemmer said, likening contemporary Americans to tax slaves. "We're really trying to show our taxes are too high, and government is too big, and on that day we're asking everybody to stand with us and let the government know they work for us."

Before the planned general strike and gathering in Washington April 15, Volusia Tax Reform will participate in a protest at the Capitol in Tallahassee March 25, France said.

"We're planning a statewide bus trip for a tax-reform rally in Tallahassee," she told The DeLand-Deltona Beacon. "We're involved with Floridians for Property Tax Reform. They're the ones organizing this."

France said Volusia Tax Reform will try to charter at least two buses to take supporters to the Tallahassee gathering "to urge the Legislature to do meaningful tax reform."

"We're being taxed to death," she said.

Volusia Tax Reform Executive Director Margie Patchett agreed.

"We're part of a revolution, because people are outraged about taxes," said Patchett. "The whole tax situation we have is hurting everybody."

-- al@beacononlinenews.com

Article originally published at http://www.beacononlinenews.com/dailyitem.php?itemnum=658



Who will be on board?

[Tron5000]

As I told SuBe, I can't not go to work on April 15 (without likely losing my job), but I will spread the word about these people and their movement. American citizens are obviously fed up with our current oppressive system of taxation, and it is time for a revolution. It starts with us, the people, and gains momentum as we press our elected representatives to more carefully study HR 25 and S 1025 and the immensely beneficial effects that such legislation would have on our economy (nationally and at home).

[CorpusBlack]

I just wish we could put copies of the books in the hands of all Americans and say, "Look, before you decide you don't like the idea of the FairTax, please take a weekend and read these 2 books and see if your opinion on the matter changes."

Unfortunately many people don't like to read anymore. They trust the internet as their source of information and base their ideology off of what they're spoon fed. Yet, idiots like them are the first to pass judgment on something that they have no knowledge about.

Plus, those who do read that are against it have already made their minds up and wouldn't want to "waste" their time reading what they perceive as "fantasy".

[SuBe]

I urge everyone that supports the FairTax to link this Thread in their Sig as a sign of Solidarity. Let's show the Support that a great plan like this needs.

The only way we are going to get this to fruition is to educate others.

[Tron5000]

I urge everyone that supports the FairTax to link this Thread in their Sig as a sign of Solidarity. Let's show the Support that a great plan like this needs.

The only way we are going to get this to fruition is to educate others.

Already there, big guy.

[Handsome Rob]

I'm game.

[SuBe]

Already there, big guy.

I'm game.
Awesome! Thanks Guys!

Urge others to do the Same. Malice is reading the books now. I think after he finishes them, he'll be on board too!

[Handsome Rob]

I met with a couple of financial planners, today . . . dropped "FairTax" into the conversation. :woot:

[SuBe]

That's funny. I drop FairTax every chance I get. If some one is talking about high gas prices. FAIRTAX. If someone is talking about Insurance being pre-taxed, FAIRTAX. Low Wages, FAIRTAX. The Price of Milk, FAIRTAX. It is probably my most used word in a day.

[Tron5000]

That's funny. I drop FairTax every chance I get. If some one is talking about high gas prices. FAIRTAX. If someone is talking about Insurance being pre-taxed, FAIRTAX. Low Wages, FAIRTAX. The Price of Milk, FAIRTAX. It is probably my most used word in a day.

Heard some dude call into the radio station yesterday whining about how he wouldn't get his homeowner's deduction under the FairTax. Now, just why do you need a deduction from your income taxes if you pay none? Would you rather pay $8,000 in income taxes to save $2,000, or would you rather just keep that $8,000 altogether?

And when people talk about a 23% tax on top of (rather than embedded in) retail prices, I'll explain to them how that is not the case, and when they persist in arguing the point, I just say, "OK, fine. Let's assume it IS a 23% tax on top of the retail price; let's also assume that you keep the 30% of your paycheck that the government currently takes from you each pay day. Seems to me you're still ahead by 7% in the long run."

[SuBe]

Yeah, I love Simple Logic. I blame Public Schools, but that is a discussion for another thread.

Thats what is really great about the FairTax, 100% Paycheck, and it is simple and clean.

[SuBe]

No forcing you to pay taxes at with a gun at your head.

A lot of people don't realize that IRS Field Agents have guns, and if you don't pay your taxes, you go to jail, where there's more guns. Under the FairTax, YOU decide when you pay your taxes. You decide IF you are going to pay taxes. What could be better?

[CorpusBlack]

I urge everyone that supports the FairTax to link this Thread in their Sig as a sign of Solidarity. Let's show the Support that a great plan like this needs.

The only way we are going to get this to fruition is to educate others.

done.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

No forcing you to pay taxes at with a gun at your head.

A lot of people don't realize that IRS Field Agents have guns, and if you don't pay your taxes, you go to jail, where there's more guns. Under the FairTax, YOU decide when you pay your taxes. You decide IF you are going to pay taxes. What could be better?


:up:

I couldn't agree more.

[SuBe]

:up:

I couldn't agree more.
Join us, add this Thread's link onto your sig, and show your support.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Just did :up:

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Heard some dude call into the radio station yesterday whining about how he wouldn't get his homeowner's deduction under the FairTax. Now, just why do you need a deduction from your income taxes if you pay none? Would you rather pay $8,000 in income taxes to save $2,000, or would you rather just keep that $8,000 altogether?

And when people talk about a 23% tax on top of (rather than embedded in) retail prices, I'll explain to them how that is not the case, and when they persist in arguing the point, I just say, "OK, fine. Let's assume it IS a 23% tax on top of the retail price; let's also assume that you keep the 30% of your paycheck that the government currently takes from you each pay day. Seems to me you're still ahead by 7% in the long run."

I hope you have gotten into a debate with someone about this and pwned them with that line :up:

[SuBe]

Just did :up:
Awesome!!! Spread the word!!!

Remember, if anyone has any questions, or want any specifics, ask.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

1) To Malice or any other mods, why can this thread not get a sticky?

2) I know this topic is political in nature but would it be possible for this thread to be moved to the main community forum? It does hold quite a bit of significance and importance that the majority of threads here do not.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Awesome!!! Spread the word!!!

Remember, if anyone has any questions, or want any specifics, ask.

There's pretty much pros and cons to everything and nothing is perfect. I'm curious if you can SB, could you post a list of pros vs. cons about the Fairtax just a quick summary.

[Tron5000]

SuBe, I thought you might like this:


http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f206/harrelson2131/fairtax-sign.jpg


Forget the bumper sticker. I got the friggin' sign (from the rally about 2 months ago) in my rear windshield.

[SuBe]

^ Awesome! I wish I had one of those.

[Tron5000]

There's pretty much pros and cons to everything and nothing is perfect. I'm curious if you can SB, could you post a list of pros vs. cons about the Fairtax just a quick summary.

The only real "con" I see is that people who are employed as a direct result of our current tax code (many accountants, lobbyists and tax attorneys) would have to look for another line of work. Beyond that, we get to keep our entire paychecks, businesses and jobs will re-locate back to America, those on the lowest end of the financial spectrum will get more per month in their rebate check than they actually spend on taxes, the IRS will forever be abolished, you can choose how much in taxes you pay the government (by withholding taxes in the form of lowering your discretionary spending)...the list goes on and on.

Some will claim that it is a "con" that the sales tax % would be so high (23% inclusive), but this is an inclusive tax that would replace current embedded taxes. This will not cause prices to rise as some would claim, because you are simply replacing current embedded taxes with 1 new inclusive tax, and the competitive nature of the free-market economy would ensure that prices remain stable.

And even if it WERE an additional 23% added on to the retail price (which it is not), you're receiving on your paycheck the 30% that the government currently takes from you. So even if it were true that it would be an additional 23% (which it is not), when you get that 30% back, you'd still be ahead by 7% in the long run.

[SuBe]

1) To Malice or any other mods, why can this thread not get a sticky?

2) I know this topic is political in nature but would it be possible for this thread to be moved to the main community forum? It does hold quite a bit of significance and importance that the majority of threads here do not.
I don't want this to be in the Community Forum. For one, it receives more views here, and two, more mature posters frequent the Politics forum. This thread has a nice home right here.

[SuBe]

There's pretty much pros and cons to everything and nothing is perfect. I'm curious if you can SB, could you post a list of pros vs. cons about the Fairtax just a quick summary.
It'll take me a minute that I don't have right now, but I'll do something this weekend and post it.

[SuBe]

The only real "con" I see is that people who are employed as a direct result of our current tax code (many accountants, lobbyists and tax attorneys) would have to look for another line of work. Beyond that, we get to keep our entire paychecks, businesses and jobs will re-locate back to America, those on the lowest end of the financial spectrum will get more per month in their rebate check than they actually spend on taxes, the IRS will forever be abolished, you can choose how much in taxes you pay the government (by withholding taxes in the form of lowering your discretionary spending)...the list goes on and on.

Some will claim that it is a "con" that the sales tax % would be so high (23% inclusive), but this is an inclusive tax that would replace current embedded taxes. This will not cause prices to rise as some would claim, because you are simply replacing current embedded taxes with 1 new inclusive tax, and the competitive nature of the free-market economy would ensure that prices remain stable.

And even if it WERE an additional 23% added on to the retail price (which it is not), you're receiving on your paycheck the 30% that the government currently takes from you. So even if it were true that it would be an additional 23% (which it is not), when you get that 30% back, you'd still be ahead by 7% in the long run.

Third Paragraph, plus the Prebate, which offsets your current tax liabilty to ensure that you do not have to pay the government to live. Just pay them for every purchase above the Poverty level, which is about $10,100 a year.

[Tron5000]

^ Awesome! I wish I had one of those.

2 more in the house windows:


http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f206/harrelson2131/IMG_0553.jpg


Yeah, you shoulda been at the rally. Boortz and Linder were there. It was a good time.

[SuBe]

2 more in the house windows:





Yeah, you shoulda been at the rally. Boortz and Linder were there. It was a good time.
Was it at the one in Jacksonville? I haven't had a chance to go to a ralley yet. I've been to both book signings with Boortz. I bought over 20 copies of the FairTax books for gifts and gave away 5 of the new ones. I started this thread back in November or December. We just hit 5044 views on this Thread, which makes it the 4 highest viewed Thread on the Political Forum, 2nd if you don't count the Merged Threads. I tell everyone about it. All it takes is a seed to be planted and for people to begin to think how bad our system really is. And how the FairTax, while not perfect, is much better for both the individuals and the Country as a whole, and even other countries that purchase American made goods, by removing the tax component out of the Cost of Goods sold overseas.

It's a Great system, and I'm a proud supporter of it!

[Tron5000]

Was it at the one in Jacksonville? I haven't had a chance to go to a ralley yet. I've been to both book signings with Boortz. I bought over 20 copies of the FairTax books for gifts and gave away 5 of the new ones. I started this thread back in November or December. We just hit 5044 views on this Thread, which makes it the 4 highest viewed Thread on the Political Forum, 2nd if you don't count the Merged Threads. I tell everyone about it. All it takes is a seed to be planted and for people to begin to think how bad our system really is. And how the FairTax, while not perfect, is much better for both the individuals and the Country as a whole, and even other countries that purchase American made goods, by removing the tax component out of the Cost of Goods sold overseas.

It's a Great system, and I'm a proud supporter of it!

The rally was at an airport in Gwinnett County, GA (where I live). I'm lucky enough to live in Boortz's home city and Linder's Congressional district. We get a lot of attention around here.

Yeah, this thread is doing pretty well. And I really like the fact that unlike many threads in the Political forum, the conversation here is almost always casual and civilized. Actual conversation and discussion, not just people bickering and attempting to shout one another down.

[SuBe]

The rally was at an airport in Gwinnett County, GA (where I live). I'm lucky enough to live in Boortz's home city and Linder's Congressional district. We get a lot of attention around here.

Yeah, this thread is doing pretty well. And I really like the fact that unlike many threads in the Political forum, the conversation here is almost always casual and civilized. Actual conversation and discussion, not just people bickering and attempting to shout one another down.
I live in Boortz other Home Town.

I try to Monitor the discussion on here, I like to think of it more as a Classroom, instead of a debate. I want to teach people about it, Try to sell it, so to speak. And let people know how bad we really have it now. And what the FairTax would do for this country.

[Tron5000]

I live in Boortz other Home Town.

I try to Monitor the discussion on here, I like to think of it more as a Classroom, instead of a debate. I want to teach people about it, Try to sell it, so to speak. And let people know how bad we really have it now. And what the FairTax would do for this country.

It will do tremendous positive things for this country, but to convince people that we need the FairTax, just focus on the positive effect it would have on individuals. If people can see that they would be personally better off with the FairTax, that's when they'll go for it.

[SuBe]

From Boortz's Blog:

ANOTHER WONDERFUL GOVERNMENT SCHOOL TEACHER
It is no secret that I am not a fan of government education. Not to rehash the whole thing here, but the idea that loving parents would turn the most precious things in their lives – their children – over to the government to be educated astounds me. If you can trace the decline in our country to any one thing, I would put government schools right there at the top of the list.
At any rate --- let's just say that I'm not at the top of the Christmas Card list for too many government school teachers, and that would include one Lana Snellgrove at the Peachtree Ridge High School (http://www.peachtreeridge.org/index.html), one of the wonderful Gwinnett County Georgia government schools.
http://boortz.com/images/fairtax_the_truth_100.jpgAccording to an email we received from one of Ms. Snellgrove's students, she assigned her students the task of writing a research/persuasive essay. The topic was meant to be controversial. One student chose to write about the FairTax. She was informed by Ms. Snellgrove that The FairTax Book could not be cited as a source of information on the FairTax because one of the book's co-authors, (that would be me) is not a credible source. This student tried to explain to the government employee that The FairTax Book was one of the most reliable and direct sources of information available to her. The teacher wasn't swayed. She insisted that I am not a credible source and that the student had to find information on the FairTax elsewhere.
This is way past amazing. The FairTax Book, written by yours truly and Congressman John Linder, the author of H.R. 25, The FairTax Act, debuts at Number 1 on the New York Times Bestsellers list .. and this government school teacher says that the book is not a credible source of information about the FairTax? Does this make sense on any level?
The student tells me that she is going to cite my book in her essay anyway ... and let Lana Snellgrove respond as she pleases. We'll be hearing back from the student on this, so let's see if Ms. Snellgrove stops being a government employee and starts being an actual teacher for a few days.
Oh .. an update. I'm now informed that Ms. Snellgrove did provide this student with what she (Ms. Snellgrove) determined to be a reliable and credible source for information about the FairTax. The source is an anti-FairTax article written by one Joel Slemrod (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/13/books/review/13slemrod.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) and published in the New York Times. No surprise there. Slemrod says in that article that there is not one reputable economist of any political stripe that would support the FairTax. Tell that to the economists who support the FairTax, like Lawrence Koltikoff, the chairman of Boston University's Economics department. This is what Ms. Snellgrove decides is a credible source for information on the FairTax, not a book co-authored by the Congressman who wrote the bill.
What do you think, folks? Is this teacher just taking out her dislike for me on one of her students? I wonder if she would like to invite me to appear before her class and make her case then and there that I am not a credible source of information about the FairTax?
And before we move on to something else, let's recognize how good it is that some high school students out there – probably more than I suspect – are aware of the FairTax and would like to see it in place before they start their working careers.

http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html

[Tron5000]

From Boortz's Blog:



http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html

Gotta love them government schools.

Boortz should actually request the opportunity to present his case to the class. It would be quite fun to hear how the teacher responds when Boortz asks why he is not a "credible source."

[SuBe]

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m38/Spacemonkey3434/100_2662.jpg

[Tron5000]

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m38/Spacemonkey3434/100_2662.jpg

Can you actually smoke cigars in your office? If so, that is so friggin' sweet...

[SuBe]

Can you actually smoke cigars in your office? If so, that is so friggin' sweet...
Yup, and I get to listen to Neal Boortz every morning too. I love my job.

Anyway, yeah FairTax!

[Odin's Lapdog]

just read the first page of this thread, i'm going to read the rest by the time i'm done but i just wanted to say i think it's a great thread

[SuBe]

just read the first page of this thread, i'm going to read the rest by the time i'm done but i just wanted to say i think it's a great thread
Thank you very much. All questions asked have been answered, but if there are anything that you need answered or clarified, go ahead and ask.

[CorpusBlack]

Welcome to the 3K Club SuBe.

[SuBe]

Welcome to the 3K Club SuBe.
Holy Crap, I didn't realize it! Thanks.

[Odin's Lapdog]

quick question.

suppose a large percentage of the population were against the government regime on something like going to war in a middle eastern country.

One could easily rally up enough support to stop people purchasing any goods for let's say a whole week.

This kind of 'people strike' could seriously limit funds and attacks the government right where it hurts while businesses in the seige are willing to get by since they know their small hurt is affecting their hated government on a much larger scale.

So how do you get those in a position of power to relinquish their ability to get a steady flow of cash coming in to fund their schemes

I mean ultimately, it's not their war efforts they will take the remaining funds from, but from all the other social welfare and medical regions.

[SuBe]

quick question.

suppose a large percentage of the population were against the government regime on something like going to war in a middle eastern country.

One could easily rally up enough support to stop people purchasing any goods for let's say a whole week.

This kind of 'people strike' could seriously limit funds and attacks the government right where it hurts while businesses in the seige are willing to get by since they know their small hurt is affecting their hated government on a much larger scale.

So how do you get those in a position of power to relinquish their ability to get a steady flow of cash coming in to fund their schemes

I mean ultimately, it's not their war efforts they will take the remaining funds from, but from all the other social welfare and medical regions.
Great Question:

How do you have more Power?

2 things, one, Politicians are going to "reduce" their work load by half. By that I mean, current they spend about half of their time focused on how to tax new programs or increase taxes on a group or decrease taxes on another. Under the FairTax, Politicans in Congress won't have to do that as everyone is taxes evenly. No more legislation affecting Tax Code. So, more time on real issues. So, with this, they may be more open to their constituants views on current events as their job longer (getting Reelected) means they are going to get voted in based on their Tax Policy, rather than their Policy on War or whatever.

The Second thing is, if you don't agree with what that politician is doing for a paticular governmental program, you just don't spend money up to the poverty line. $10,100 a year. And Remember, that doesn't mean don't spend money at all, you will be receiving the Prebate, which effectively pays you back for the Taxes you pay once a month for Goods and Necessities that you need to live. So, if you keep your money, and just buy things you need. You are not paying the Government anything. If enough people do that, and the General Revenue dips enough, the Politicians are going to see a report that tells them that the people don't like what they are doing, and that makes them change what they are doing. Plus remember, they won't be receiving phone calls and Letters about Tax Code as much as they are now, so they will be listening more to your opinions of real issues, not taxes.

[CorpusBlack]

SuBe reppin' the FairTax as always!

[Odin's Lapdog]

but how is a nation going to progress if everyone just ends up saving because they don't like the governments

I mean sure, they'll listen for a while but sooner or later the crap will hit the fan. I mean a single day without a purchase (say january sales or during the xmas period) is going to be a HUUUUUGE blow to the country

What about in the events of natural disasters or a stock market crash or a fall in housing prices.

As a citizen, I would be all for a fair tax but as a government, not knowing when or how much i'm getting from month to month with dips and falls all the time and my whole expenditure dependant on the commercial business seems a bit...daring...

[CorpusBlack]

just found this...

http://www.myspace.com/fairtax

[Ahura Mazda]

but how is a nation going to progress if everyone just ends up saving because they don't like the governments

I mean sure, they'll listen for a while but sooner or later the crap will hit the fan. I mean a single day without a purchase (say january sales or during the xmas period) is going to be a HUUUUUGE blow to the country

What about in the events of natural disasters or a stock market crash or a fall in housing prices.

As a citizen, I would be all for a fair tax but as a government, not knowing when or how much i'm getting from month to month with dips and falls all the time and my whole expenditure dependant on the commercial business seems a bit...daring...


How realistic is that scenario? Try and see how much you spend in a day and then realise to limit your spending can be a hardship at times. I spend over $10k a month and if I wanted to cut down I would still be spending 3-4K a month but that would be through sacrifices.

In addition, how many times is everybody in agreement on something in a democracy....almost never and therefore it would be extremely rare to have enough of a cut in spending that would affect the government in such a way as to force them to change policy and if it did happen it would not be something that would last.

[Odin's Lapdog]

without rent/bills, i've lived off £10.01 for a week before

:o

even with rent, it was 130

What you are also hoping is that such a circumstance won't happen when its bound to in one shape or another.

If everyone is willing to give a minute's silence for rememberance day, I don't see the problem with people or at least 90% of the population not spending on the first day of sales.

a people's strike, so to speak

[Tron5000]

I think withholding taxes in the form of limiting discretionary spending would work great. The way to accomplish this would be to email or write letters to your elected representatives in Washington (Congress) and explain to them that you are cutting back on discretionary spending because you disagree with the government's intentions for your tax money. If enough representatives in Washington receive such correspondence, this creates a dialogue in Congress.

"Hey, my constituents are cutting back on spending because they disagree with X."

"Mine as well."

"I've heard the same. Perhaps we should address the issue of X, because our constituents are showing us with their hard-earned dollars that they are strongly opposed to this idea."

Herman Cain, Atlanta-area local talk-show host and sometimes fill-in for Boortz, suggests having your elected representatives on your email address list. That way, when you disagree with an issue, you come home after work and shoot them an email explaining your grievances. This is how the immigration bill came crashing down last year; citizens voiced their opposition to their representatives, and the wheels came off that wagon with the quickness.

[SuBe]

I think withholding taxes in the form of limiting discretionary spending would work great. The way to accomplish this would be to email or write letters to your elected representatives in Washington (Congress) and explain to them that you are cutting back on discretionary spending because you disagree with the government's intentions for your tax money. If enough representatives in Washington receive such correspondence, this creates a dialogue in Congress.

"Hey, my constituents are cutting back on spending because they disagree with X."

"Mine as well."

"I've heard the same. Perhaps we should address the issue of X, because our constituents are showing us with their hard-earned dollars that they are strongly opposed to this idea."

Herman Cain, Atlanta-area local talk-show host and sometimes fill-in for Boortz, suggests having your elected representatives on your email address list. That way, when you disagree with an issue, you come home after work and shoot them an email explaining your grievances. This is how the immigration bill came crashing down last year; citizens voiced their opposition to their representatives, and the wheels came off that wagon with the quickness.
Thanks, I didn't have too much time to answer that yet.

[Odin's Lapdog]

I think withholding taxes in the form of limiting discretionary spending would work great. The way to accomplish this would be to email or write letters to your elected representatives in Washington (Congress) and explain to them that you are cutting back on discretionary spending because you disagree with the government's intentions for your tax money. If enough representatives in Washington receive such correspondence, this creates a dialogue in Congress.

"Hey, my constituents are cutting back on spending because they disagree with X."

"Mine as well."

"I've heard the same. Perhaps we should address the issue of X, because our constituents are showing us with their hard-earned dollars that they are strongly opposed to this idea."

Herman Cain, Atlanta-area local talk-show host and sometimes fill-in for Boortz, suggests having your elected representatives on your email address list. That way, when you disagree with an issue, you come home after work and shoot them an email explaining your grievances. This is how the immigration bill came crashing down last year; citizens voiced their opposition to their representatives, and the wheels came off that wagon with the quickness.

Isn't giving this much power to the average joe a dangerous thing.

Considering all the information we get about things is passed on from the media, doesn't it ultimately give them the right to hijack the country for its own demands of have information leaked to the masses which may have a large financial backlash.

Isn't giving too much power to the average civilian a bad thing.

I've always thought as governments being employed to do that, Govern us. We are paying them to ultimately know best, in teh same way we would employ an investment banker to look after our stocks. I would hate to think that i would have the ability to stop an investment banker from putting my funds into tampons (because i think they are icky) and into knives (because they are cool) and have him fold because i'd stop paying him a decent rate, even if it is in the best interest of my funds.

I ultimately think that the average person is a sheep that is easily led and giving them the perception that they know what is best for themselves is like opening a whole pandora's box worth of pain.

I guess i have less faith in you and i than in some lying politicians, at least i know what i'm getting with lying politicians.

[Tron5000]

Isn't giving this much power to the average joe a dangerous thing.

Considering all the information we get about things is passed on from the media, doesn't it ultimately give them the right to hijack the country for its own demands of have information leaked to the masses which may have a large financial backlash.

Isn't giving too much power to the average civilian a bad thing.

I've always thought as governments being employed to do that, Govern us. We are paying them to ultimately know best, in teh same way we would employ an investment banker to look after our stocks. I would hate to think that i would have the ability to stop an investment banker from putting my funds into tampons (because i think they are icky) and into knives (because they are cool) and have him fold because i'd stop paying him a decent rate, even if it is in the best interest of my funds.

I ultimately think that the average person is a sheep that is easily led and giving them the perception that they know what is best for themselves is like opening a whole pandora's box worth of pain.

I guess i have less faith in you and i than in some lying politicians, at least i know what i'm getting with lying politicians.

No. The average citizen IS where the power lies. In fact, the converse is true; we have given the federal government FAR TOO MUCH power.

We are not employing our elected representatives because they know more than we do about this country and the world. We vote for people because we feel that those people will best represent our ideals and desires. When we feel they have failed to do so, we fire them (i.e. we elect someone else).

Our Founding Fathers warned us of the perils of a federal government with too much power. We, The People, not They, The Federal Government, get to decide what course this country takes. Most of these elected representatives are only out to save their jobs (get re-elected next term). They know this is unlikely to happen if they do not represent their constituents in a responsible manner. We have to keep them honest.

[SuBe]

Tron, you make a good substitute Teacher when I'm too busy with work. Thanks.

OL, He is right, it seems you are from a European Country, and in so, have more of a Europeon Mindset. But, in the United States, the Goverment is our Representatives, not our Masters. I hope the same is for you in your country, but I cannot speak for your country. The Government is there to do the things we hire them for (elect them for). The only power the government has is power we as a people grant them.

But, remember, that is more of a discussion for another thread. Where as the FairTax gives you more power back, is the discussion at hand.

If your concern is the Amount of Revenue collect via the FairTax versus our Current system of Income/Payroll/Corporate Taxes, the FairTax is Revenue Netrual. Which means, the Government will collect the Same on day one of the FairTax as it would with our Current Tax Code, but it will have more room to grow as you grow the Economy.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

From Boortz's Blog:



http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html

WOW, although this should not surprise me, it does.

I really don't understand that teacher's thinking at all. I took a look at the website fairtax.org and noticed that one of the University professor's that has endorsed the fairtax act is actually at a local university of mine. I think I am going to go visit and have a chat with him if I can. :up:

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Tron, you make a good substitute Teacher when I'm too busy with work. Thanks.

OL, He is right, it seems you are from a European Country, and in so, have more of a Europeon Mindset. But, in the United States, the Goverment is our Representatives, not our Masters. I hope the same is for you in your country, but I cannot speak for your country. The Government is there to do the things we hire them for (elect them for). The only power the government has is power we as a people grant them.

But, remember, that is more of a discussion for another thread. Where as the FairTax gives you more power back, is the discussion at hand.

If your concern is the Amount of Revenue collect via the FairTax versus our Current system of Income/Payroll/Corporate Taxes, the FairTax is Revenue Netrual. Which means, the Government will collect the Same on day one of the FairTax as it would with our Current Tax Code, but it will have more room to grow as you grow the Economy.


Well that is how it is supposed to work lol.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

How does the fairtax affect small business owners? Mom and pop stores?

[SuBe]

How does the fairtax affect small business owners? Mom and pop stores?
It puts them on a level playing field (tax wise) with big corporations, they only need to forward taxes collected from their sales, as opposed to big corportations that have the ability to send lobbyists to Washington and fight for big tax breaks and so on. They would only need to foward those taxes on sales, not on payroll and FICA and matching contributions. This would cut down time they have to do paper work that Large Corportations can afford to hire CPA for. Small Companies usually don't have the funds to do this, so they have to do it themselves, which means more time taken away from making their small mom and pop shop a bette success.

[CorpusBlack]

Discovered this as well for all you Boortz lovers w/ a MySpace.

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=120515335

[Tron5000]

It puts them on a level playing field (tax wise) with big corporations, they only need to forward taxes collected from their sales, as opposed to big corportations that have the ability to send lobbyists to Washington and fight for big tax breaks and so on. They would only need to foward those taxes on sales, not on payroll and FICA and matching contributions. This would cut down time they have to do paper work that Large Corportations can afford to hire CPA for. Small Companies usually don't have the funds to do this, so they have to do it themselves, which means more time taken away from making their small mom and pop shop a bette success.

Not to mention that included in "the rich" that are currently taxed at a high level are small-business owners. These people (especially those with a relatively new business) often do not have very high personal incomes, yet their business income counts against them for tax purposes. These high tax rates prevent the small-business owner from investing more into his business, expanding, hiring more employees, etc. When these taxes are abolished and the small-business owner simply collects the FairTax from the customer and passes it along to the government, he will not only have more time to invest in his business but more finances as well. This promotes business expansion, leading to more income from the business owner and more jobs for others. That's more money going right back into the system when that business owner and his employees purchase goods above the poverty level. Everybody wins.

[Doctor Strange]

quick question.

suppose a large percentage of the population were against the government regime on something like going to war in a middle eastern country.

One could easily rally up enough support to stop people purchasing any goods for let's say a whole week.

This kind of 'people strike' could seriously limit funds and attacks the government right where it hurts while businesses in the seige are willing to get by since they know their small hurt is affecting their hated government on a much larger scale.To be honest, that would be impossible. To play along, though, if that were to happen, it wouldn't have any noticeable effect.

I mean ultimately, it's not their war efforts they will take the remaining funds from, but from all the other social welfare and medical regions.The FairTax replaces the federal income tax. It is replacing one means of collection with a better system. It is not designed to move appropriations from one budget area to another.

but how is a nation going to progress if everyone just ends up saving because they don't like the governments

I mean sure, they'll listen for a while but sooner or later the crap will hit the fan. I mean a single day without a purchase (say january sales or during the xmas period) is going to be a HUUUUUGE blow to the countryNo, it wouldn't. You overstate how much an impact that would be. Besides, if it winds up being an instrument to eliminate departments and programs and to limit spending, then the FairTax is an even better idea. Besides, nations don't "progress" because of spending.

What about in the events of natural disasters or a stock market crash or a fall in housing prices.What about them? We are a federation of 50 sovereign states. It is up to the states to respond, not the federal government. We live in a free market economy. People invest, they either gain or lose, whether it's the stock market or housing market. It is their decision and it is not the role of government to take care of them and to bail them out if they've made poor fiscal decisions.

If everyone is willing to give a minute's silence for rememberance day, I don't see the problem with people or at least 90% of the population not spending on the first day of sales.

a people's strike, so to speakWhat is there to "strike" against? Again, the FairTax is replacing one means of collecting revenue with another. It is not designed to steer x amount of dollars to one part of the budget, y amount to another, and so on.

Isn't giving this much power to the average joe a dangerous thing.Isn't giving too much power to government a dangerous thing? Yes, it is. That's why our founding fathers recognized the tyranny of government and fought for their liberty and independence and that of future generations. We are a government OF the people and BY the people. The people are the government. But that is the nature of the FairTax; it would be the largest transfer of power BACK to the people.

I've always thought as governments being employed to do that, Govern us. We are paying them to ultimately know best, in teh same way we would employ an investment banker to look after our stocks.Uh, no. We are not paying them to "ultimately know best". Again, there is no "them"; government is "we".

I would hate to think that i would have the ability to stop an investment banker from putting my funds into tampons (because i think they are icky) and into knives (because they are cool) and have him fold because i'd stop paying him a decent rate, even if it is in the best interest of my funds.Sounds like you're on the side of fascism to me. I'm in charge of my own life, not government. I don't need government to take care of me.

I ultimately think that the average person is a sheep that is easily led and giving them the perception that they know what is best for themselves is like opening a whole pandora's box worth of pain.This probably explains why you seem to favor a fascist dictatorship.

I guess i have less faith in you and i than in some lying politicians, at least i know what i'm getting with lying politicians.Believe me, I have absolutely no faith in you.

Regardless, this is a thread about the FairTax. If you have any questions about it, please ask. If you'd rather discuss fascist, communist, socialist, anarchist political views, then find some other thread to do so.

[Tron5000]

To be honest, that would be impossible. To play along, though, if that were to happen, it wouldn't have any noticeable effect.

The FairTax replaces the federal income tax. It is replacing one means of collection with a better system. It is not designed to move appropriations from one budget area to another.

No, it wouldn't. You overstate how much an impact that would be. Besides, if it winds up being an instrument to eliminate departments and programs and to limit spending, then the FairTax is an even better idea. Besides, nations don't "progress" because of spending.

What about them? We are a federation of 50 sovereign states. It is up to the states to respond, not the federal government. We live in a free market economy. People invest, they either gain or lose, whether it's the stock market or housing market. It is their decision and it is not the role of government to take care of them and to bail them out if they've made poor fiscal decisions.

What is there to "strike" against? Again, the FairTax is replacing one means of collecting revenue with another. It is not designed to steer x amount of dollars to one part of the budget, y amount to another, and so on.

Isn't giving too much power to government a dangerous thing? Yes, it is. That's why our founding fathers recognized the tyranny of government and fought for their liberty and independence and that of future generations. We are a government OF the people and BY the people. The people are the government. But that is the nature of the FairTax; it would be the largest transfer of power BACK to the people.

Uh, no. We are not paying them to "ultimately know best". Again, there is no "them"; government is "we".

Sounds like you're on the side of fascism to me. I'm in charge of my own life, not government. I don't need government to take care of me.

This probably explains why you seem to favor a fascist dictatorship.

Believe me, I have absolutely no faith in you.

Best.

First.

Post.

EVER!


Welcome aboard, good sir.

[Malice]

One obvious problem with the Fair Tax system (and I have yet to read my books)

Taxes, the way they are implemented now, do offer incentives.
For instance, companies, are given incentives to perform certain actions...Like invest in green technologies. They are given large tax breaks to invest or perform certain actions.

If the IRS goes bye bye (granted we all are not to sad about seeing that go) how would the government provide incentives to companies to perform certain actions.

Would the loss of incentives (in this example) for Green Technologies go away? I mean, if they are not given an incentive to do it for a financial gain, human nature states the companies will no longer do it.

Thoughts?

[Tron5000]

One obvious problem with the Fair Tax system (and I have yet to read my books)

Taxes, the way they are implemented now, do offer incentives.
For instance, companies, are given incentives to perform certain actions...Like invest in green technologies. They are given large tax breaks to invest or perform certain actions.

If the IRS goes bye bye (granted we all are not to sad about seeing that go) how would the government provide incentives to companies to perform certain actions.

Would the loss of incentives (in this example) for Green Technologies go away? I mean, if they are not given an incentive to do it for a financial gain, human nature states the companies will no longer do it.

Thoughts?

Companies will invest even more heavily in new technologies. As you point out, they currently invest in technology because it is financially beneficial for them. Well, there is a market out there for alternative energy, meaning that a profit can be made by discovering and selling these new sources of energy. Companies such as BP and ExxonMobil will break their backs to be the ones to offer these technologies to the public, 'cause they want those profits. The financial incentive to offer these technologies to the public can only rise. Stop taxing the companies so heavily, and just watch how fast they develop new sources of energy when they have more capital to invest in them.

[Malice]

Companies will invest even more heavily in new technologies. As you point out, they currently invest in technology because it is financially beneficial for them. Well, there is a market out there for alternative energy, meaning that a profit can be made by discovering and selling these new sources of energy. Companies such as BP and ExxonMobil will break their backs to be the ones to offer these technologies to the public, 'cause they want those profits. The financial incentive to offer these technologies to the public can only rise. Stop taxing the companies so heavily, and just watch how fast they develop new sources of energy when they have more capital to invest in them.

its funny, I must have a more pesimistic attitude here, I see the companies dropping the programs that were developed SOLELY because of the tax breaks.

Capitalism of course will drive some of these things...but I dont think the companies will just keep investing unless business drives it. Most wont do it out of the goodness of their hearts.

[SuBe]

One obvious problem with the Fair Tax system (and I have yet to read my books)

Taxes, the way they are implemented now, do offer incentives.
For instance, companies, are given incentives to perform certain actions...Like invest in green technologies. They are given large tax breaks to invest or perform certain actions.

If the IRS goes bye bye (granted we all are not to sad about seeing that go) how would the government provide incentives to companies to perform certain actions.

Would the loss of incentives (in this example) for Green Technologies go away? I mean, if they are not given an incentive to do it for a financial gain, human nature states the companies will no longer do it.

Thoughts?
First things First, Doc Strange, Welcome to the Hype, and I am Honored you picked my FairTax Thread to start off in. :up:

2nd, The Role of Government should not be to dictate your actions via the Tax Code. Wouldn't you agree? Should the Goverment be allowed to not Tax one business, yet heavily tax a Economic Nessesity? I.E. Oil Taxes. Corporate Taxes on Oil Companies just get trickled to the Consumer, you and me. If they raise taxes on Corporations that are in the Business of Oil, the Oil Company will have to raise their Margins to Cover their New Tax Liability. Which means, higher Gas Prices for the Consumer.

The Goverment shouldn't play favorites. It only should be there for Protection form Threats Domestic and Foreign. It should provide the Infrastructure for the Economy to take place, but not force the Hand of the Free Market. If a Company wants to "go green", let the Market decide if it stays afloat. Which that means, let you and me decide, because that is what is going to happen anyway. Taxation on Corporations just leads to more Lobbyists. Remember, the FairTax replaces all Federal Taxes. So, it is not Taxing any Corportation over any other.

[Tron5000]

its funny, I must have a more pesimistic attitude here, I see the companies dropping the programs that were developed SOLELY because of the tax breaks.

Capitalism of course will drive some of these things...but I dont think the companies will just keep investing unless business drives it. Most wont do it out of the goodness of their hearts.

Hell no they won't. They're in business to make money. And there is a market for these goods and services, so money can be made. Competition among the corporations will result in expedited implementation of these new technologies. And with fewer dollars being taken by the government in the form of taxes, these companies will have more finances to invest in these technologies.

The free market always prevails in giving American consumers goods and services that are desired. I can think of no government intervention that has ever produced a product more efficiently than has the free market.

[Malice]

Maybe my example is wrong.

Tax Exemptions are typically given to companies to have them try to do something that is generally not as profitable.

I just dont see a company continuing in things that may be the right thing to do....if the govt is not promoting it.

Green Technologies are still in their infancy. They are more expensive. if the exemptions go away, I would almost bet some of those companies would can their "green businesses"

[SuBe]

its funny, I must have a more pesimistic attitude here, I see the companies dropping the programs that were developed SOLELY because of the tax breaks.

Capitalism of course will drive some of these things...but I dont think the companies will just keep investing unless business drives it. Most wont do it out of the goodness of their hearts.
I can agree with that, but that is true for everyone and every Company. They will only prusue it if there is profit. And with todays Eviro-political Standards, there is a Market for "green" Energy. Tax Breaks have little to do with that.

[Doctor Strange]

One obvious problem with the Fair Tax system (and I have yet to read my books)

Taxes, the way they are implemented now, do offer incentives.
For instance, companies, are given incentives to perform certain actions...Like invest in green technologies. They are given large tax breaks to invest or perform certain actions.

If the IRS goes bye bye (granted we all are not to sad about seeing that go) how would the government provide incentives to companies to perform certain actions.

Would the loss of incentives (in this example) for Green Technologies go away? I mean, if they are not given an incentive to do it for a financial gain, human nature states the companies will no longer do it.

Thoughts?Incentives = tax breaks. If there is no income tax, then what need is there for tax incentives or tax breaks? Tax is collected at the final point of retail under the FairTax. Embedded taxes down the production line are completely removed. If taxes are removed, then what need is there for tax incentives?

[Malice]

I can agree with that, but that is true for everyone and every Company. They will only prusue it if there is profit. And with todays Eviro-political Standards, there is a Market for "green" Energy. Tax Breaks have little to do with that.

I disagree partly. The Green movement is growing in the public and that is driving some of the need. The other thing driving it is tax exemptions (plus a few laws)

But, what drove it early on...a good few years ago, was the very minor green energy movement, and that created tax exemptions...thus starting many of the companies to examine it.

Its the tax exemptions in the very early that help move it forward in a issues infancy.

[Malice]

Incentives = tax breaks. If there is no income tax, then what need is there for tax incentives or tax breaks? Tax is collected at the final point of retail under the FairTax. Embedded taxes down the production line are completely removed. If taxes are removed, then what need is there for tax incentives?

hey Doc, welcome, my posts is bouncing back and forth between the Fair Tax and current tax system

[Tron5000]

Maybe my example is wrong.

Tax Exemptions are typically given to companies to have them try to do something that is generally not as profitable.

I just dont see a company continuing in things that may be the right thing to do....if the govt is not promoting it.

Green Technologies are still in their infancy. They are more expensive. if the exemptions go away, I would almost bet some of those companies would can their "green businesses"

I think you greatly underestimate the desire that many people have for these technologies.

And government involvement in green technologies is damaging other areas of the economy. US farmers typically used around 7.5 million acres annually to produce corn. Well, because of government mandates for ethanol, that number rose last year to over 10.5 million. That's an additional 3 million acres devoted to growing the corn crop; 3 million acres taken away from other goods to devote to corn. This means less area to grow other crops and raise livestock. Therefore, the demand for these other goods (wheat, milk, meat) has either stayed the same or risen, but the supply has dropped. That is why we have seen a rise in the prices of beef, milk, eggs...all because of government intrusion into the free market economy.

[Doctor Strange]

its funny, I must have a more pesimistic attitude here, I see the companies dropping the programs that were developed SOLELY because of the tax breaks.And they might. Nothing wrong with that; however, if demand is there, someone will recognize the opportunity and will meet demand.

[Malice]

I think you greatly underestimate the desire that many people have for these technologies.

And government involvement in green technologies is damaging other areas of the economy. US farmers typically used around 7.5 million acres annually to produce corn. Well, because of government mandates, that number rose last year to over 10.5 million. That's an additional 3 million acres devoted to growing the corn crop; 3 million acres taken away from other goods to devote to corn. This means less area to grow other crops and raise livestock. Therefore, the demand for these other goods (wheat, milk, meat) has either stayed the same or risen, but the supply has dropped. That is why we have seen a rise in the prices of beef, milk, eggs...all because of government intrusion into the free market economy.

Lets not focus on green technologies and stupid legislations...

I am just examining the removal of the current tax system, how it works with tax incentives to companies to innovate...

[Tron5000]

Lets not focus on green technologies and stupid legislations...

I am just examining the removal of the current tax system, how it works with tax incentives to companies to innovate...

The incentives (more money) would remain, but merely in a different form. Instead of the company receiving more money from tax breaks, the incentive will be the profits that will be derived from the sale of these new technologies.

[SuBe]

I disagree partly. The Green movement is growing in the public and that is driving some of the need. The other thing driving it is tax exemptions (plus a few laws)

But, what drove it early on...a good few years ago, was the very minor green energy movement, and that created tax exemptions...thus starting many of the companies to examine it.

Its the tax exemptions in the very early that help move it forward in a issues infancy.
I am of the Mindset that the only reason the Politicians passed Tax Breaks for Green Technologies is because of Public Demand. The Free Market would ensure that this techonologies are developed through competition. Would one of these companies that currently know that there is a market, drop their research, only to have a competitor continue their work? And in doing so lose market share? I don't think so.

Anyway, freeing up Corporate Dollars would lead to more Research in new technologies as they would be free of Corporate Taxes. Plus, the US would be a Tax Haven for Foreign Corporations to move to our shores, which means an increase in Competition along with more Jobs.

[Doctor Strange]

I disagree partly. The Green movement is growing in the public and that is driving some of the need. The other thing driving it is tax exemptions (plus a few laws)the "green movement" is being driven by a select few (ahem...Al Gore) who realize they can make money off of it and are trying to whip up hysteria to present this as a "crisis". The CEO of GE said, "Green is green." Meaning, there is an opportunity to make money. He's right. Take away the politicians and fear mongers and their media lapdogs, and I think consumer "demand" would plunge.

But, what drove it early on...a good few years ago, was the very minor green energy movement, and that created tax exemptions...thus starting many of the companies to examine it.In other words, what drove it was government telling people what to do, and not consumer demand.

Still, if there is no income tax...if there are no embedded taxes...then why would a tax incentive be needed?

[Doctor Strange]

I am of the Mindset that the only reason the Politicians passed Tax Breaks for Green Technologies is because of Public Demand. Actually, it is rooted in anti-capitalism. It is nothing but a wealth redistribution shell game. The public demand for green is very much overstated, but the media is right there to bang the drum, making it seem as if "demand" is higher than it is. Same thing with the economy and the subprime. We're talking 5% of homeowners who were fiscally irresponsible, but that's who the media focuses on, grossly inflating and distorting the impact. 95% of mortgage holders are responsible homeowners who are making their payments.

[SuBe]

Actually, it is rooted in anti-capitalism. It is nothing but a wealth redistribution shell game. The public demand for green is very much overstated, but the media is right there to bang the drum, making it seem as if "demand" is higher than it is. Same thing with the economy and the subprime. We're talking 5% of homeowners who were fiscally irresponsible, but that's who the media focuses on, grossly inflating and distorting the impact. 95% of mortgage holders are responsible homeowners who are making their payments.
That is my belief also, but, I would like for this thread to remain Strictly about the FairTax, and not become a debate about the Eviroment. My point was to answer Malice's question. The Example could have been about anything that is Politically Mandated onto the Business world. I was just discussing the process would remain intact, though the proces would be streamlined by the free market.

[Malice]

Dont you hate it when you cant seem to produce a question and put it correctly?

I think we are hitting all around the mark, not just hitting the bullseye.

Maybe we are hitting it, and maybe I am just dense. :)

My thoughts.

The government, when it provides tax incentives to companies for something, is usually driven by one or more of the following: a) Public Demand b) Lobbiests c) Specific Financial Circumstances

Now, that being said, in the beginning of a "movement", and I am only using the Green movement as an example, but lets not concentrate on that exclusively. Something drives the movement and that movement starts influencing politics, and in this example, influences tax incentives.

If the Tax incentives are there in the very beginning, they are trying to get people to look into some type of "business/innovation/change of the norm" from what they do now. They would have done that originally if it was financially viable in the first place. So since they are getting some breaks on taxes, making this new business endeavor a little more cost friendly on the business side, what happens when those tax incentives go away.

In our example, the green movement gets all whipped up to get green technologies. But since the new government and tax system does not have the ability to give tax breaks to research it....the companies, as I see it, wont, and thus the green movement dies.

Does this make sense...? Sorry, at work and keep getting interupted with issues and I have to keep restarting my train of thought

[Tron5000]

Malice, I see where you're coming from. I just think your beliefs are slightly flawed.

These corporations are currently taxed at such a high rate that sometimes government involvement is necessary to begin the advancement of new technologies (such as green technologies). The reason these tax breaks are a necessity is because the corporations are already paying so much money to the government in the form of taxes. Taking this money away from these corporations discourages investment in new technologies. Once the FairTax is implemented and these companies get to keep all their profits, they will have much more money to invest in technologies and grow their profits. As such, tax incentives are no longer needed.

Tax incentives spur growth, but growth that has already been impeded by the ridiculously burdensome and oppressive tax system. Once this system is abolished, investment will skyrocket.

[SuBe]

I think I understand the point of your question.

Under the FairTax, business's only incentive would be money. They will create the Technology if there is Demand for it, Tax break or Not, because the demand is there. With the FairTax, there would be more Competition in the mix, therefore the Technology would still be research and delivered to the market, but at a cheaper price due to higher competition.

[Malice]

thanks for your thoughts...as much as I hate the tax system the tax breaks in government really do a good job trying to get companies to invest in certain issues.

I have a hard time thinking just because they pay less in taxes overall (with the Fair Tax system) that those issues to be researched will be looked into...I may be wrong, this is in an area of business that I am not familiar with.

[Tron5000]

thanks for your thoughts...as much as I hate the tax system the tax breaks in government really do a good job trying to get companies to invest in certain issues.

I have a hard time thinking just because they pay less in taxes overall (with the Fair Tax system) that those issues to be researched will be looked into...I may be wrong, this is in an area of business that I am not familiar with.

I agree that under our current tax system, incentives are a very good thing to spur growth and investment. But once these taxes are eliminated, the issue of incentives is rendered moot. There will always be people (companies) looking to develop new technologies in order to provide a good or service that is in demand in the marketplace. Government just needs to get the hell out of the way let smart people do what smart people have always done: innovate.

[Doctor Strange]

In our example, the green movement gets all whipped up to get green technologies. But since the new government and tax system does not have the ability to give tax breaks to research it....the companies, as I see it, wont, and thus the green movement dies.

Does this make sense...? Sorry, at work and keep getting interupted with issues and I have to keep restarting my train of thoughtOk. The free market is driven by supply and demand, not government trying to round it up like cattle to steer industry into a direction it wants it to go - for whatever political reason. If the green movement (or any movement) dies in the free market, so be it. That's the nature of the market. Industry, business, and entrepreneurship will recognize opportunity if they feel there is a demand for something. Tell government to get out of the way and quit interfering and let market forces direct themselves naturally. That simply isn't government's job.

Still, there will not be a loss of revenue for the government with the FairTax. I'm sure money will still be pumped into various sectors for research. The government is always going to need new technology for the military, etc. Industry and business will still be in competition with each other. Competition spurred by demand and opportunity is what drives research. Building a better mousetrap, in other words.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

I'm curious. Can anyone here obtain the numbers for dollar amounts of taxes collected last year and the amount of money spent on purchases?

[SuBe]

I'm curious. Can anyone here obtain the numbers for dollar amounts of taxes collected last year and the amount of money spent on purchases?
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_audiovideo_QA_videoclips

A lot of questions are answered in this Video FAQ. Check it out.

I don't have the numbers in front of me to answer that question right now, but it is in the new FairTax book "Answering the Critics". I remember that they stated (And had the link to the study) that shows how Taxes affect Retail Sales. The Trend shows that Retail Sales have been on an upward climb for the past 100 Years vs. Earnings when adjusted for Inflation. Remember, you have to EARN money to be taxed on it, under the FairTax, you just have to spend it to be taxed on it. So, under the Current System, if you don't have a job, whether poor or a billionaire, you don't get taxed on that money.

[Doctor Strange]

I'm curious. Can anyone here obtain the numbers for dollar amounts of taxes collected last year and the amount of money spent on purchases?

this might be it, but i'm not sure
http://www.census.gov/mrts/www/data/html/nsal07.html

As I'm sure you're all aware, SS is bankrupt. There is no trustfund; there is no lockbox.Well, there is, but it's sitting in a federal office in West Virginia filled with federal IOU's. The amount being paid out is greater than the amount coming in. With the baby boomers hitting the retirement age, it's going to be a disaster. While I would like to eliminate, or at least privatize SS, the FairTax is a bit of a solution. It won't prevent the complete collapse, but it can forestall it. SS taxes are paid by people with an income. A 16-year old kid flipping a burger has money taken out of his paycheck to go to some grandma. Only those with income are "contributing" to SS. Since the FairTax is a sales tax, EVERYONE would be contributing. Those with jobs and those without. Those who do file W2s and those who don't. Foreign visitors, legal and illegal would be contributing. Black market participants would be contributing. Retirees would be contributing.

The FairTax is a simple concept: Replace the federal income tax with a 23% national sales tax. That 23% is inclusive, meaning it is built into the sticker price and not added on at the cash register. Currently, there is about 22-23% of embedded taxes in everything we buy. Corporations don't pay taxes - they are passed down the line to the consumer, built into the final price. These embedded taxes would be eliminated and replaced with the 23% sales tax.

On top of that, every family or individual would receive a prebate check at the beginning of the month that would offset the taxes on necessities. This prebate check is based on number of household, and not income. That means Bill and Melinda Gates would get the same check every month as my wife and I would.

For those who believe accountants would be out of a job, that isn't true. Accountants overwhelmingly are in favor of the FairTax. They would much rather tend to bookkeeping, crunching numbers, and looking where their employers and clients can save money than poring over receipt after receipt after receipt to deal with the current tax codes.

[CorpusBlack]

I love that this thread is still blowing up. However, I do miss the days of old when all the nay-sayers would come in here and challenge SuBe, only to leave with their tails between their legs, never to be seen on this thread again. I think there is a good core group of FairTax supporters here now or at least people who are open to it.

[SuBe]

I love that this thread is still blowing up. However, I do miss the days of old when all the nay-sayers would come in here and challenge SuBe, only to leave with their tails between their legs, never to be seen on this thread again. I think there is a good core group of FairTax supporters here now or at least people who are open to it.
Yeah, I miss those days. I haven't seen Lackey or Superman4ever in a long time, posting arbirtrary Articles, criticizing something they dont understand. Just posting nonsense, only to get defeated. Ha.


I miss the challenges. But, I hope that means more people are understanding the FairTax.

[CorpusBlack]

I hope that means more people are understanding the FairTax.

Sparkle never will. :cwink:

[SuBe]

Sparkle never will. :cwink:
I see someone is stiring the Pot!

Yeah, he posted once. Never to return.

[CorpusBlack]

I see someone is stiring the Pot!

Yeah, he posted once. Never to return.

I just Nimished the thread. ;)

[Doctor Strange]

As a very wise poster in this thread said,

"H.R. 25 was introduced at the beginning of 2007. It has not been scheduled for debate, but has been referred to the Ways and Means committee. Congress is in session for two years and after the session is up, all proposed bills and legislation that have not passed are wiped from the books. This pretty much happened when it was introduced in 2003. If it is considered by Ways and Means and makes it out of committee, it will have to pass the House and Senate before being signed by the President.

http://www.vote-smart.org/resource_govt101_02.php "

Unfortunately, one of the worst representatives is chair of the committee: Charles Rangel of New York.

Here is a list of committee members:

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/members.asp

I would urge EVERYONE to contact these representatives on committee. Contact them and tell them you don't want the bill to die in committee. Tell them - hound them - that you want scheduled hearings and debates on the bill. TELL THEM TO SEND THIS BILL TO THE FLOOR! I would urge you to contact YOUR representative and tell them to do the same. There is no excuse not to. Legislation has already been introduced. Let's get it moving.

[Doctor Strange]

Sparkle never will. :cwink:Good. I'd prefer non-citizens to sit out. This is an issue for Americans, not for kibbitzing foreigners.

[Mr Sparkle]

hahahaha I smell someone that got banned and came back.
isn't that illegal!? GASP!

and, uh, just so you know, I AM an American. WTF? :confused:

[CorpusBlack]

Good. I'd prefer non-citizens to sit out. This is an issue for Americans, not for kibbitzing foreigners.

:lmao:

hahahaha I smell someone that got banned and came back.
isn't that illegal!? GASP!

and, uh, just so you know, I AM an American. WTF? :confused:

Glad to see you're still checking the thread. Whether you're on board w/ the plan or not. :up:

[Doctor Strange]

and, uh, just so you know, I AM an American. WTF? :confused:I thought you were Mexican.

[Mr Sparkle]

technicality.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

I thought you were Mexican.

Mexicans are American. Be careful, some people take extreme offense to that.

[StorminNorman]

Mexicans are American. Be careful, some people take extreme offense to that.

Mexicans are Mexican and from Mexico. Americans are American and from The United States of America.

Being from North America does not make you an American.

[Doctor Strange]

technicality.technicality? no.

Mexicans are American. Be careful, some people take extreme offense to that.Mexicans are NOT American, and no one has the right to not be offended.

Back to the FairTax...

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Mexicans are Mexican and from Mexico. Americans are American and from The United States of America.

Being from North America does not make you an American.



technicality? no.

Mexicans are NOT American, and no one has the right to not be offended.

Back to the FairTax...

Being from either North or South America makes you American. Period.

[Doctor Strange]

Being from either North or South America makes you American. Period.No, it doesn't. Period.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

The United States of America does not make you the only exclusive Americans. This country is a collective of different races and ethnic backgrounds. It has no real culture anymore, it is a melting pot of many difference nationalities no longer having a singular one to claim America as the definitive nationality.

If anyone has a claim to being "American" it would be Native Americans and Mexicans.

[Handsome Rob]

FairTax, folks. Let's get back to the topic at hand. :bh:

Anyone who thinks that tax compliance isn't a big cost driver in business needs to look at GE. For FY 2005, they filed a tax return electronically that if printed out would have been roughly 24,000 pages long. Or, if printed out, it would have resulted in a stack of paper eight feet high. Think of how many billable CPA hours went into the preparation of that.

FairTax, FTW.

[Arkady Rossovich]

I would be glad to see America changing how it's taxes go. I doubt it has been changed in nearly 100 years. There are loopholes,and you can't see where it goes. Like taxes being used to fund Iraq,this is why some refuse to pay their taxes because they want nothing to do with it. Something new should be done...people deserve their full pay. The Government works for the people,not the other way around.

[SuBe]

Yay, HanRob! Drivin' the FairTax Boat back on course.

Yes, GE is a good example. Just think about all the Small Businesses and all the other Corporations that have to increase the price of their goods just to cover their Tax Compliance Costs. It was estimated that in 2005, $250-500 Billion were spent just doing taxes. That is including what it cost to investigate a tax desicion. Which means, corporations are necessarily doing what is best for their customers, employees, share holders or the business, but what the tax implications are.

Just imagine it in your personal life, would you move to a city, knowing full well that you were going to pay 30% more taxes? Would that make you reconsider moving there?

[SuBe]

I would be glad to see America changing how it's taxes go. I doubt it has been changed in nearly 100 years. There are loopholes,and you can't see where it goes. Like taxes being used to fund Iraq,this is why some refuse to pay their taxes because they want nothing to do with it. Something new should be done...people deserve their full pay. The Government works for the people,not the other way around.
That is actually part of the problem, the Tax Code did change, and does change every year. It only get more complicated everytime some politician adds something to "fix" it or there tax increases. This all addes to more pages to the Tax Code, making it harder and harder to understand. Thats why the FairTax is a much better system.

One Federal Tax, 23% of what you spend. No loopholes, no exemptions, no deductions, no personal audits, nothing stiffling Investments, no Punishment for keeping your money or earning money. Just 23% on what you spend. Simple.

[Doctor Strange]

The United States of America does not make you the only exclusive Americans. This country is a collective of different races and ethnic backgrounds. It has no real culture anymore, it is a melting pot of many difference nationalities no longer having a singular one to claim America as the definitive nationality.

If anyone has a claim to being "American" it would be Native Americans and Mexicans.It most certainly does, and there is most certainly an American - that's USA to you - culture. Our culture is one of liberty, freedom, opportunity, individuality, and the rule of law established by the people and of the people. We are a singular nationality, and there is only one nationality. We are not Irish-Americans, or Korean-Americans, or African-Americans - we are Americans. People do not claim a nationality because of a prior generation's ancestral home; they claim a heritage.

As for "native Americans"...I'm a native American; my parents were born here and so was I. So were many of my ancestors. Now take this open borders crap somewhere else. If you have a question about the FairTax, please ask.

[Doctor Strange]

I would be glad to see America changing how it's taxes go. I doubt it has been changed in nearly 100 years. There are loopholes,and you can't see where it goes. Like taxes being used to fund Iraq,this is why some refuse to pay their taxes because they want nothing to do with it. Something new should be done...people deserve their full pay. The Government works for the people,not the other way around.Again, the FairTax is a means of collection, not a means of distributing the revenue across the budget or channeling it into a particular program or department.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

It most certainly does, and there is most certainly an American - that's USA to you - culture. Our culture is one of liberty, freedom, opportunity, individuality, and the rule of law established by the people and of the people. We are a singular nationality, and there is only one nationality. We are not Irish-Americans, or Korean-Americans, or African-Americans - we are Americans. People do not claim a nationality because of a prior generation's ancestral home; they claim a heritage.

As for "native Americans"...I'm a native American; my parents were born here and so was I. So were many of my ancestors. Now take this open borders crap somewhere else. If you have a question about the FairTax, please ask.


Nice to see you have such an open mind :up:

[SuBe]

Lets keep this strictly about the FairTax, thanks.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

I will from now on. :up:

[SuBe]

I will from now on. :up:
Thanks.

My point for making this thread was to educate others about the FairTax vs. our current system. If we get derailed into other topics, it might put off others that want to learn about the FairTax because all they see is talk about subjects completly unrelated to the FairTax. That is why I don't want to discuss this necessarily as a Political Issue also. This is nothing about the Right vs. the Left. Or Republicans vs Demacrats. This is just a Better Tax Code for the 21st Century. Even though More Republicans support this Legislation, there are plenty of Democrats that do also. AND, Some very powerful Democrats stated off the record that they fully support the FairTax, but won't support it publically until History can show that the Democrats gave this to the American People.

But enough about that. We need to be respectful of eachother, and just keep the Discussion going about the FairTax, and everything else, keep it off this thread.

Thanks

[Malice]

Thanks.

My point for making this thread was to educate others about the FairTax vs. our current system. If we get derailed into other topics, it might put off others that want to learn about the FairTax because all they see is talk about subjects completly unrelated to the FairTax. That is why I don't want to discuss this necessarily as a Political Issue also. This is nothing about the Right vs. the Left. Or Republicans vs Demacrats. This is just a Better Tax Code for the 21st Century. Even though More Republicans support this Legislation, there are plenty of Democrats that do also. AND, Some very powerful Democrats stated off the record that they fully support the FairTax, but won't support it publically until History can show that the Democrats gave this to the American People.

But enough about that. We need to be respectful of eachother, and just keep the Discussion going about the FairTax, and everything else, keep it off this thread.

Thanks

Super...record an audio file about it!

[SuBe]

Super...record an audio file about it!
I don't have the means or the time. I talked to a friend about doing a Youtube video once, but it didn't get off the ground. I posted a great portion of the FairTax website yesterday that has a great Video FAQ. Thats about as good as it gets for now.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Thanks.

My point for making this thread was to educate others about the FairTax vs. our current system. If we get derailed into other topics, it might put off others that want to learn about the FairTax because all they see is talk about subjects completly unrelated to the FairTax. That is why I don't want to discuss this necessarily as a Political Issue also. This is nothing about the Right vs. the Left. Or Republicans vs Demacrats. This is just a Better Tax Code for the 21st Century. Even though More Republicans support this Legislation, there are plenty of Democrats that do also. AND, Some very powerful Democrats stated off the record that they fully support the FairTax, but won't support it publically until History can show that the Democrats gave this to the American People.

But enough about that. We need to be respectful of eachother, and just keep the Discussion going about the FairTax, and everything else, keep it off this thread.

Thanks

That is one of the biggest problems in this country. It's all about sides, why should there be a side if this country is supposedly "United".

[SuBe]

Yeah, I agree. But it does show the Great Effects of this Tax Plan that they would want to hide this treasure, you know?

At least they are considering it. It wouldn't be hard to assume that they can get on board and sign it into law with just a little more support from us, everyday citizens.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Yeah good point, I see what you mean.

[Doctor Strange]

why should there be a side if this country is supposedly "United".Fifty sovereign states are united into one republic. Some people want more governmental control and power, especially over others' monies; others want limited government.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Fifty sovereign states are united into one republic.

You're missing my point.

[Doctor Strange]

You're missing my point.Sure, when you lop off the part that directly addresses it. But even this little bit you chose to quote addresses it, too.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

I didn't lop anything off. I quoted you directly and that's all that was there. Regardless you still miss my point.

[Tron5000]

I believe yesterday we were discussing the issue of whether or not oil companies would invest in new technologies without the tax incentives they currently receive to do so.

http://townhall.com/Columnists/DavidStrom/2008/04/03/if_hypocrisy_were_an_energy_source_we_could_drill_ in_congress

According to the California Energy Commission, which breaks down the components of a price of gasoline, only six cents of the price of a gallon of gasoline went for distribution costs, marketing costs, and profits for the oil companies. That is six cents out of $3.61 cents at the pump. Sixty-three cents, or ten times as much, went directly into government coffers as state and federal taxes. And that doesn't include the income taxes the oil companies paid.

Exxon Mobil, whose profits have earned the ire of Congress, paid $27,000,000 in income taxes on those profits in 2007. That is actually more than all the income taxes paid by the bottom 50% of taxpayers. Exxon Mobil alone paid more in taxes than 65,000,000 individual taxpayers paid as a group. Of course in reality it wasn't the oil companies who paid that tax, but you and I every time we fill up at the pump. Government makes more money off the oil companies than the shareholders do.

$27 million in taxes. That's money that could be used to research and develop new energy sources. Not to mention, that's $27 million in only income taxes, on top of the federal and state taxes that are already going straight to the government with every sale.

The rest of the article is great, but I just posted that snippet 'cause it relates to the FairTax.

[SuBe]

I believe yesterday we were discussing the issue of whether or not oil companies would invest in new technologies without the tax incentives they currently receive to do so.

http://townhall.com/Columnists/DavidStrom/2008/04/03/if_hypocrisy_were_an_energy_source_we_could_drill_ in_congress



$27 million in taxes. That's money that could be used to research and develop new energy sources. Not to mention, that's $27 million in only income taxes, on top of the federal and state taxes that are already going straight to the government with every sale.

The rest of the article is great, but I just posted that snippet 'cause it relates to the FairTax.
Great Find Tron!!!

I am definately going to read that article. I don't read enough from Townhall.com. I only read Bruce Bartletts insane articles about the FairTax and thought it was one of those sites I tend to avoid.

[Tron5000]

Great Find Tron!!!

I am definately going to read that article. I don't read enough from Townhall.com. I only read Bruce Bartletts insane articles about the FairTax and thought it was one of those sites I tend to avoid.

There are a couple guys on there, including Jerry Bowyer and I believe Rich Lowry, that have posted negative articles about the FairTax. But I like the overall content. I usually check the Columnists section every day.

The articles and opinions cover a very wide of topics. But it's like any other site...hit and miss. Some good, some not so. Boortz even sometimes posts columns responding to FairTax detractors.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

I believe yesterday we were discussing the issue of whether or not oil companies would invest in new technologies without the tax incentives they currently receive to do so.

http://townhall.com/Columnists/DavidStrom/2008/04/03/if_hypocrisy_were_an_energy_source_we_could_drill_ in_congress



$27 million in taxes. That's money that could be used to research and develop new energy sources. Not to mention, that's $27 million in only income taxes, on top of the federal and state taxes that are already going straight to the government with every sale.

The rest of the article is great, but I just posted that snippet 'cause it relates to the FairTax.

That doesn't sound right. More than 65,000,000 tax payers didn't pay more than $27 million?

That means they didn't pay any taxes at all essentially.

[Handsome Rob]

The FairTax was the subject of an opinion article in today's "The Tennessean" (Nashville newspaper):

http://tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080404/OPINION03/804040426/1007/OPINION

Although, they did print it online as the "Fair Tax." :cmad:

[SuBe]

That doesn't sound right. More than 65,000,000 tax payers didn't pay more than $27 million?

That means they didn't pay any taxes at all essentially.
Who Pays Income Taxes? See Who Pays What


For Tax Year 2005
Percentiles Ranked by AGI
AGI Threshold on Percentiles
Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid
Top 1%
$364,657
39.38
Top 5%
$145,283
59.67
Top 10%
$103,912
70.30
Top 25%
$62,068
85.99
Top 50%
$30,881
96.93
Bottom 50%
<$30,881
3.07
Note: AGI is Adjusted Gross Income
Source: Internal Revenue Service

For Tax Year 2004
Percentiles Ranked by AGI
AGI Threshold on Percentiles
Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid
Top 1%
$328,049
36.89
Top 5%
$137,056
57.13
Top 10%
$99,112
68.19
Top 25%
$60,041
84.86
Top 50%
$30,122
96.70
Bottom 50%
<$30,122
3.30
Note: AGI is Adjusted Gross Income
Source: Internal Revenue Service


For Tax Year 2003
Percentiles Ranked by AGI
AGI Threshold on Percentiles
Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid
Top 1%
$295,495
34.27
Top 5%
$130,080
54.36
Top 10%
$94,891
65.84
Top 25%
$57,343
83.88
Top 50%
$29,019
96.54
Bottom 50%
<$29,019
3.46
Note: AGI is Adjusted Gross Income
Source: Internal Revenue Service



http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6


This is showing that the bottom 50% of income earners pay about only 3% of the entire income Taxes collected by the IRS. Whether it is $27 million, I do not know. I will have to do more research on that site. The Link Site, by the way, is the National Taxpayers Union. They get all of their Stats from the IRS.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Not to say that the numbers that have been posted are wrong. But they can not be right. No way can they be right. Someone that wins a lotto in any state and takes cash up front would pay close to half in taxes after having half of it taken.

Someone making a million dollars a year would pay at least $400,000 in taxes, I am sure they have all sorts of deductions and what not but I am sure they are paying at least $20,000 when it is all said an done no matter how good their financial adviser is.

$20,000 times 650,000 people (which would only be the top 1% of people in this nation that work or pay taxes) and you get roughly $1.2 billion dollars.

I know I am speculating but it just doesn't make sense that 65,000,000 people all together only pay $27 million dollars in taxes.


Maybe those numbers are supposed to be dollar amounts shown in millions? That would make more sense.

[SuBe]

Not to say that the numbers that have been posted are wrong. But they can not be right. No way can they be right. Someone that wins a lotto in any state and takes cash up front would pay close to half in taxes after having half of it taken.

Someone making a million dollars a year would pay at least $400,000 in taxes, I am sure they have all sorts of deductions and what not but I am sure they are paying at least $20,000 when it is all said an done no matter how good their financial adviser is.

$20,000 times 650,000 people (which would only be the top 1% of people in this nation that work or pay taxes) and you get roughly $1.2 billion dollars.

I know I am speculating but it just doesn't make sense that 65,000,000 people all together only pay $27 million dollars in taxes.


Maybe those numbers are supposed to be dollar amounts shown in millions? That would make more sense.

One thing, the lottery "winners" and I use "" because they usually don't enjoy the money after winning it, Don't pay income taxes, they pay a Different kind of tax, so it isn't included in that figure. Second, people on the bottom 50% don't pay often $20,000 in income taxes, most will pay at or less than $10,000. I myself pay roughly $13000 a year in taxes, but about 7.6% is FICA, so that is again, not considered Income Taxes. These figures are only Income Taxes, Not other taxes.

But, you are right, the numbers do seem a bit odd. There is a chapter in the new FairTax book about that. I'll have to re-read it because it does have a Federal Chart.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

One thing, the lottery "winners" and I use "" because they usually don't enjoy the money after winning it, Don't pay income taxes, they pay a Different kind of tax, so it isn't included in that figure. Second, people on the bottom 50% don't pay often $20,000 in income taxes, most will pay at or less than $10,000. I myself pay roughly $13000 a year in taxes, but about 7.6% is FICA, so that is again, not considered Income Taxes. These figures are only Income Taxes, Not other taxes.

Ok gotcha and I didn't mean the bottom 50% I meant the top 1%. Roughly 650,000 people have to be paying at least $20,000 a year in federal income taxes.

Then again maybe there are other things I am not seeing as you mentioned FICA and what not.

[SuBe]

Some one asked a little while ago about Income Taxes Collected vs. Retail Sales in the US. Here is a Graph I found about the Stability of Retail Sales vs. Income Earned

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/36/TaxbaseStability.png

As you can see, the Retail Sales or Consumption level is more stable than income. So that means Income Taxes are less stable than Consumption.

[SuBe]

From Neal Boortz Blog on the FairTax

OK ... STAND BY FOR ME TO GO BALLISTIC ABOUT FAIRTAX OPPONENTS
Twenty two million dollars. For those of you who do better with numbers than letters, that would be $22,000,000.00. That's the amount of money spent to come up with the original FairTax plan. This money was spent on research by economists and other financial groups; on focus groups across the country; and on comprehensive studies of alternative ways of raising revenue for the operation of government and the consequences of those various methods.
Twenty-two million bucks, and day after day we have to suffer the uninformed and frankly unintelligent slings and arrows launched by people who left their rational reasoning skills far behind as they started their life's journey, or who are so deeply steeped in their petty jealousies and wealth envy, nurtured, no doubt, by their own feelings of personal failure, that they couldn't form a cohesive and rational thought about the FairTax if their very lives depended on it.
I present for you here two letters to the editor that appeared in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Wednesday, April 9th. Following each letter I'll deliver the appropriate verbal thrashing and try to set the record straight.

Want a nation of masters and serfs? Regarding the letter "Learn facts about FairTax, please" (@issue, April 3): While studying the FairTax, I discovered that its core is a consummate cut of any obligatory federal taxes. That leaves the wealthiest in our country with no federal taxes to compensate the U.S. for the gifts showered upon them or to keep the wealth gap at a sane level. FairTax supporters are looking toward a state of chaos if they succeed. Our present plutocracy will become much worse, a country of masters and serfs.
WILLIAM L. FELL
Athens

Well my, my my. What do we have here? Does it look to you like Mr. Fell (a very prolific letter writer, by the way) may be suffering a bit from wealth envy? How do you like his assertion that the wealthy in this country (however he might define that) had "gifts showered upon them." This is part of the tired old leftist, anti-capitalist saw that the wealthy in our country did no real work to earn their wealth, it was just handed them; or "showered upon them," as Mr. Fell says, or, as Dick Gephardt liked to say, they "won life's lottery." In any event, these leftists are loathe to admit that the wealthy actually worked their tails off for the wealth they enjoyed. Those destined for wealth were working 60 and 80 hour weeks while those destined to remain in the middle class were looking at the clock just waiting for quitting time to come around.
What upsets Mr. Fell so much about the wealthy? Well .. he has two choices here. First, he can work hard, make correct choices, delay gratification and become wealthy. Second .. he can make poor choices, work his 40 hours a week and go home and completely fail to plan for his financial future .. and remain right where he is right now. But .. .if he chooses the latter, he certainly won't be willing to take the blame for his plebian economic status. He'll give himself a pass by trying to convince himself, and others, that those nasty rich people just had wealth "showered upon them." Other than the fact that they got a shower of riches while he got the proverbial golden shower ... he's just as good as they are.
Yeah, right.
Fell thinks that under the FairTax the "wealthiest in our country" will pay no taxes to the federal government. Let's give him a break. There's always the possibility he was educated in government schools. Besides, his left-leaning outlook has poisoned him to the concept of achievement.
First of all, what Mr. Fell may not realize is that the "wealthiest in our country" are quite possibly not paying income taxes under the present system. And why not? Because they're already wealthy. They don't need to work any more. They let their investments work for them.
Let's take the case of Warren Buffet. Several months ago Buffet, with great fanfare, announced to the world that his secretary paid a higher tax rate than he does. Well, duh. His secretary pays income taxes. Warren Buffet pays capital gains taxes. Capital gains taxes are maxed out right now at 15%, and that would be lower than the rate his secretary pays on her salary. Funny how the leftist media didn't bother to point out that little fact when they were touting Buffets thoughts on comparative tax rates.
So what happens to these evil rich people --- the ones who had these gifts "showered upon them" after passage of the FairTax. Well, right now if Mr. Gotrocks takes $4 million out of a savings account, or if he sells something he doesn't need anymore, and uses that $4 million to buy himself a fancy new yacht for his Naples, Florida waterfront home ... he pays nothing to the federal government. He may be socked with a hefty state sales tax ... but for the feds, nunca. After the FairTax, however, there would be a 23% national retail sales tax embedded into the price of that yacht. My government school math tells me that Mr. Gotrocks would actually be paying about $920,000 to the feds. This, to the brilliant and envious Mr. Fell, constitutes "no federal taxes."
The FairTax is the only tax reform plan out there that COMPLETELY untaxes the poor at the federal level. This isn't enough for Mr. Fell .. he has to make sure that the rich get soaked. After all ... it's not as if they worked for that money, right Mr. Fell?

Now .. onward and upward to the second letter:


Older workers would suffer Although I didn't write the original letter "FairTax wouldn't be fair to many retirees" (@issue, March 29), I disagree with the rebuttal "Learn facts about FairTax, please": The main problem with a substitute "fair" sales tax is not that it may discriminate against those with a low income, notwithstanding complicated formulas to compensate them that the rebuttal writer claims will be in place, but that older workers, and particularly retirees, have already paid hefty federal and state income taxes on their savings. Their investments in Roth IRAs, CDs and similar savings would be heavily taxed again when they cash them for everyday living.
ROBERT KRIETE
Lawrenceville


We'll be a little more gentle with Mr. Kriete because he seems to be expressing an earnest concern about the FairTax, a concern not based on wealth envy as was Mr. Fell's.
Kriete is concerned that people who have already paid federal taxes on the money they sacked away in their savings accounts, IRAs and CDs will have to pay a tax again when they take that money out and spend it during their golden years.
Free Online FairTax Seminar!
http://boortz.com/images/no_irs_65.gifIf you still have questions about the FairTax or have a friend that needs a little educating, Neal has given a FairTax seminar that's available online (http://wsbradio.com/ads/fairtax_webinar.html)! It's free! Presented by Comcast High Speed Internet. I've encountered that particular question dozens of times, and it is fully covered in "FairTax, The Truth: Answering the Critics (http://www.amazon.com/FairTax-Answering-Critics-Neal-Boortz/dp/0061540463/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1207785003&sr=8-1).

The point, Mr. Kriete, is that when these people take that money out of their savings or retirement accounts and spend it at the retail level they're going to pay taxes one way or the other. Under the present Income tax scheme they're going to pay the (average) 22% embedded tax that exists in every product or service purchased at the retail level. With the FairTax comes the end of all business and corporate income and payroll taxes and the end of this 22% tax embedded in our goods and services. Then along comes the FairTax to replace the embedded tax. So, Mr. Kriete, you see that a $700 riding lawn mower or a $16,000 Harley is going to cost pretty much the same after the FairTax as before. In one case you're paying the embedded taxes brought on by today's tax structure, in the other case you're paying the FairTax. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.
Now, Mr. Kreite, before you go .. .here's another point to consider. Not only will retirees be paying essentially the same for whatever they buy after the FairTax as before, the FairTax will also bring them their monthly prebate checks. Let's say that your retirement household numbers two. Under the FairTax you will receive a check or credit to some bank account every month equal to the FairTax you will be paying that month to purchase the basic necessities of life. Nobody --- not you, not the evil rich guy down the street, not Mr. Fell, not The Talkmaster .. .nobody who is a legal resident of this country will have to pay the FairTax on the basic necessities of life. That prebate check to you, Mr. Kreite, will be several hundred dollars a month. You'll pay no taxes on investment income. You'll pay no taxes on the interest you earn on your savings accounts. There will be no tax on your estate when you die. You will pay no capital gains taxes if you sell some stock to take a nice vacation. You will only pay the FairTax. That's it as far as federal taxes go .... PLUS ... you get that prebate check every month and the price of all the stuff you want to buy remains essentially the same.
Do you still think it is such a bad deal? There's hope for you, Mr. Kreite. For Mr. Fell ... not so much.

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Nice article :up:

[SuBe]

Nice article :up:
I thought so.

[EdRyder]

Forgive me but this isnt making any sense to me. Help?


Who Pays Income Taxes? See Who Pays What


For Tax Year 2005

Percentiles Ranked by AGI
AGI Threshold on Percentiles
Percentage of Federal Personal Income Tax Paid
Top 1%
$364,657
39.38
Top 5%
$145,283
59.67
Top 10%
$103,912
70.30
Top 25%
$62,068
85.99
Top 50%
$30,881
96.93
Bottom 50%
<$30,881
3.07





Ok, the top 1 % earn over $364 thousand a year, I get that part. But then they pay 39.38 percent of taxes?
Im lost..

It doesnt add up.The bottom 50% and the top 50% add up,..but the rest is confusing the hell out of me.

[SuBe]

Forgive me but this isnt making any sense to me. Help?




Ok, the top 1 % earn over $364 thousand a year, I get that part. But then they pay 39.38 percent of taxes?
Im lost..

It doesnt add up.The bottom 50% and the top 50% add up,..but the rest is confusing the hell out of me.[/left]
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/incometaxandtheirs/a/whopaysmost.htm

On that link is more information. Just google "Who pays the most Income Tax" and go to www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04in05tr.xls.


This is a chart that shows that tax burden.

The chart I posted eariler is really hard to read, but from the original Site, it is spelled out easier.

Basically, the top 50% of income earners are 86.58% of the total income in the US, but pay 96.70% of the Total Income Taxes collected.

[SuBe]

Happy Tax Everybody, another year down the drain!

From Boortz Blog:WELL .. HERE WE ARE. ANOTHER TAX DAY.


http://boortz.com/images/fairtax_the_truth.gifBut I have a special treat for you!
So ... did you enjoy all of the work in preparing your tax return this year? Do you think everything is just hunky dory with your return? Now that you've filed the return, do you think that there's any chance the IRA is going to send you a letter a few months down the road informing you that you are going to be audited? Isn't this all such grand fun?
As I've done every tax day for decades .. here are a few little tests to try on some of your coworkers. First .. you can ask them how much they had to pay in taxes this year. Sadly, more often than not you're going to get a response to the effect that "I didn't have to pay anything, I'm getting some back." That's the nature of our present tax system. People don't even have a clear idea of just how much income taxes they paid.
Your second task is to find out if your coworker actually knows how much they earn? Go ahead, ask them. They'll probably tell you that it is none of your business. Press the issue ... tell them there is a specific reason you're asking the question. You want to see if they really know ho much they make. If they finally cough up the information it will probably be a statement much like "Well, I take home $xxxx a week." Take home. Isn't that wonderful? Thanks to withholding people don't even know what they earn!

There is a solution, you know, and its called the FairTax. Now I'm not going to go on some long drawn out rant about how great the FairTax is today. Time for something different. If you click here you can read Chapter 13 (http://boortz.com/more/essays/fairtax13.html) of FairTax, The Truth: Answering the critics. In this chapter you ask you to imagine that you've been living under the FairTax all of your life. Then some politician comes along with an idea for a fantastic new tax system. Click here to read the chapter ... and click here (http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FFairTax-Answering-Critics-Neal-Boortz%2Fdp%2F0061540463%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Dbooks%2 6qid%3D1208247982%26sr%3D8-1&tag=abracapocus-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325) if the chapter whets your appetite and you want to read the rest of the book.
Just think about what you've been going through the past few weeks .. and think about what the IRS can do to you if you win the audit lottery. These people have all the power. You have virtually none. This balance of power can be shifted ... but you need to get out there and fight for change. Free Online FairTax Seminar!
http://boortz.com/images/no_irs_65.gifStill have questions about the FairTax? Take the online FairTax seminar (http://wsbradio.com/ads/fairtax_webinar.html) given by Neal! It's free! Presented by Comcast High Speed Internet. Everyone can click the link above to read the 13th Chapter of the Newest FairTax Book. It is the Best Chapter in the Book.