“Since you are the one attacking the plan you tell me EXACTLY where the specific numbers don’t work?”

I am not the one trying to implement a new tax plan complete with a Constitutional amendment. The President’s Advisory Panel on Tax Reform consisted of a panel including the United States Treasury Department, the IRS and was headed by Republican senators. They essentially called the FairTax bunk. Seems to me that it should be you that answers their questions and refutes them.

“Many of your assumptions in your Question 1 are not complete assumptions and the entire question is set up in such simplicity as to make it sound as if it’s an impossibility...”

That's because it is an impossibility. An illogical impossibility.

Here is the question again: Since the wealthy save more that the middle class and those savings will not be taxed (thus reducing the current tax base) until they are spent AND since the FairTax does not tax the poor (thus reducing the current tax base) via the “Prebate” AND since taxes now collected in business to business transactions are exempted from the FairTax (thus reducing the current tax base) AND since used goods are not taxed (thus reducing the current tax base) how can it possibly logically follow that taxes do not go up on the only people left: the middle class?

What part of the question poses incomplete assumptions? All of that is part of the FairTax and the only conclusion is that the middle class pays WAY more taxes. A conclusion I may add supported by the United States Treasury Department and the IRS. So of course it is impossible for you to refute.

You are correct that it is Section 801 (a)(3)(B)(ii)(I) .. where it says the tax will apply to: “the excess (if any) of the rate paid on such debt over the basic interest rate (as defined in section 805)” and not Section 802 (as I said) that taxes interest on all consumer debt over the prime rate including mortgages, credit card debt, student loans, automobile homes and all other debt that has an underlying interest rate. Your gobbledygook answer, once people wade through it, exactly proves my point. Throwing up all of the clauses seems like you might have addressed my question which was:

Do you dispute the fact that any interest incurred on car loans, mortgages, credit cards, student loans, etc over the monthly Fed rate is considered taxable as “financial intermediation services.”

A simple “No” would have been easier. You cannot dispute the text of the legislation.

Oh I love this! I was waiting for it:

“...if you really feel like the Fair Tax is not a good idea, THEN COME UP WITH ONE yourself!.... SO WHAT’S YOUR PLAN? “

I don't have one. The fact that I point out that your plan is an unworkable fantasy full of crap in no way obligates me to offer a new tax plan for the United States.

Sorry you didn't even try to answer my other questions. Once it gets past the pap I guess you give up. That suits me fine but if you ever think that this plan is going to be taken seriously y'all are going to have to eventually come up with answers to these and a lot of other questions. However, since we both know that plan is never going to be taken seriously then I accept your flimflam arguments and lack of response as appropriate.

TTFN. Have a nice day!

Economics ain't my thing. I can't even balance my checkbook.

But I've followed this dialog here for months and, though the FairTax initially struck me as a novel and feasible way of eliminating the You Know What, your cogent arguments have convinced me otherwise.

And, as a general point (this is something I do know a thing or two about), pointing out the problems in a particular plan does not entail the obligation of producing an alternative.

The day comes when there is a widespread epidemic of excruciating headaches. Someone proposes decapitation as a cure. Someone else points out that decaptitation has the inelegant consequence of certain death. The rejoinder: "Well, then, Mister Smartypants. Why don't YOU come up with some alternative?!"

____________________

"Puddleglum" by Weatherwax (one of the Muddlings).

Jeeves to the Rescue

I'm not going to have the time to debate you on this matter ad nauseum (sic). Too many more qualified candidates will continue to address some of your "il"-logic.

I've read the Fair Tax books and I happen to agree with them.

The underlying principles of the book refute many of your assertions.

1. You assert that Rich People save more money than poor people. True enough, albeit not to the same proporationate amount of their spending. You suggest that since they "save" more that this money isn't taxed. Well, thats not exactly true. Liberals all think this way, that money and wealth is static. The truth is the wealth save the money by investing it in stocks, bonds, businesses etc. To save pre-tax dollars means more money flowing into the Widget company that then employees more workers who spend the profits and are taxed.

2. You then suggest an almost zero sum gain, based upon the Rich saving their money and the poor getting a pre-bate. Your think your logic puts the tax burden on the middle class.

Well, no one says I have to purchase a brand new car and pay double the tax that a used car might cost me. No one makes me shop at Neiman Marcus or take exotic vacations. I decide what I can afford or I choose not to purchase predicated to a great extent upon the taxes. The incentive is to be a sprendthrift. Which is a good thing.

You also seem to give no value to the hidden income that is never reported. But then again, I may only live a 2 miles from you home, I might see an entirely different black market of income out there.

Whether its the guy mowing your lawn, or putting shingles on the house in the neighborhood, they are earning an income, but not paying any income taxes. I know waitresses and hairstylists work hard for their money, but I question whether their tips every see the light of a 1099. The underground economy is rabid with this type of non-reporting. Heck, look at the drug dealing that is going on. Everyone one of those security systems and grow lights would have a tax placed upon them. Yes, we would finally be able to tax criminal behavior, and I think that would be a good thing.

Mind you, I don't agree with everything in the legislation. The Pre-bate is stupid political deal breaker for me. Instead of giving money to each family once a month, I'd merely eliminate the tax on specific types of foods sold at the retail level. Milk, bread, cheese and butter, and other nutritional staples would be tax free at the local retail level for every american. While Filet Mignon's might be taxed to get the Rich to pay more, the poor would still not be taxed for merely feeding their families.

The underlying principle of the fair tax is to put the control back in the hands of the individual. We make our own choices on what purchases we need and which we want and weigh those decisions, individually. Hardly the kind of think a liberal would ever want.

Your "progressive" plan is a political tool used by whichever party holds the purse strings in Congress, to mete out benefits to those companies or groups of people that they "FEEL" need help, or as example of their power, to control those peoples and companies by writing laws that even the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee doesn't understand, or follows. I'm not surprised that you would trust ignorant government buearcrats to control average American's spending habits. Thats what liberals have been doing since the beginning of time.

Which again reminds me of Joe Biden. Being Patriotic is making the Rich Pay more, and making more than half of Americans, who typically vote Democrat, to pay nothing.

Again, to paraphrase my favorite President. If none of us are capable of knowing how to spend our own money, how can anyone be capable of telling others how we should spend our own money.

It's not the liberals that have stopped the FairTax, its President Bush and his Advisory Committee on Taxation that is putting the nails in the coffin. President Bush's IRS, President Bush's Treasury Department. Liberals? We haven't even had any kind of say on it yet.

And anyway, your Party has a lot of gall coming out now, after you've almost destroyed the entire financial system of the world and complaining about fiscal policies. The entire Republican Party and the Bush administration has been reduced to a bunch of socialists sitting around in a Kumbaya circle preaching the Communists Manifesto to each other while y'all nationalize the economic system.

You argue that the same administration that you blame for this current economic crisis we are in, is your source of allegance in fighting the FairTax.

You do understand that you are supposed to make witty but logical arguments predicated upon facts, when debating me, don't you? I thought you got the witty part right, but you failed on the logic, and of course, with the facts.

Time is going to show, I believe, in which this very real crisis was caused by a poison pill created by liberals. This pill was ingested many, many years ago when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac began lowering the requirements for lenders to accept as mortgage worthy, a huge number of people who couldn't keep their blockbuster videos from becoming overdue, much less pay a mortgage on a house, while requiring little if any proof of income, assets, or job.

Clayton County is consumed with these idiot loans being permitted. This influx of new "credit worthy" homebuyers, did what increasing demand normally does in a capitalistic society, it drove up the real estate values. Then when "victims" began to slowly default on their loans, their homes would lay vacant, thereby lowering even further the value of other homes in the neighbor. The domino effect began, and with reduced home values now meaning more and more people are upside down on their loans, more people defaulted and the vicious cycle towards this debacle began.

The blame rests in allowing Political Correctness to dictate our fiscal policies verus using ordinary common sense. Instead, rabid leaders of the victims of society, claiming their "right" to home ownership, were able to blackmail their way to a major change in the rules for qualifying in the lending business. You lowered the qualifications for homeownership, like you've lowered the qualifications it takes to be President. Lowering the lowest common denominator is a pretty typical liberal principle.

Just thank god, that you live in Fayette County, and especially Peachtree City, in which the majority of homeowners were qualified for their mortgages. They've earned an income, acquired wealth, and were financially responsible enough to deserve to own a home in such a wonderful place.

I'm sure you can't deny that last paragraph.
BTW: Fayette County Presidential Results: 2004---Bush 80%, Kerry 20% 'nuff said.

To be clear, I have no interest in fighting the FairTax. Pass it if you can. Get it out of committee if you can. I just point out the logical inconsistencies and politically suicidal parts as a semi-interested blogger and the FT’ers consistently cannot provide answers or they try to obfuscate the answer. Surely everyone will agree that before the tax is implemented and the Constitution is changed questions much more detailed than my superficial ones will have to be addressed. For sure, for sure they're going to have to answer the questions brought up by the President's Advisory Committee with something better than huffing and puffing about how all the politicians are lying and its up to me to prove the mathematics behind the FairTax wrong, then being incapable of providing the most basic and simple number in evaluating the tax, i.e. the amount of taxable personal consumption. There is of course a reason for this. I tracked down the amount of personal consumption a couple of years ago and divided it with the Federal budget. It came out around 73%. Let's see their numbers.

As to the current financial crisis, most of this can be traced to the Gramm-Leah-Bailey Act which repealed the Glass-Steagall's reforms and eliminated the wall separating security firms and banks. The bill passed with all of the Republicans voting for it as well as one Democrat (who I believe was Fritz Hollings). This legislation led to the huge leverages taken on mortgages by Lehman Brothers and most of the other investment banks which are now in trouble. Furthermore, the decades of deregulation by the Republicans and lack of oversight by the Bush administration are certainly major contributing causes.

The Democrats are certainly culpable too, but politically I think that their position is much, much more tenable than the Republicans when it comes to the blame game. I’ll tell you this for sure, trying to tie Raines to Obama is a really stupid ploy considering that McCain’s campaign manager, Rick Davis, has been paid $30,000 a month for the last five years as president of Fannie and Freddie’s advocacy group. I’m not saying it’s not fair game, just that it’s plain stupid.

Also, for political junkies, I’ll put up Volker and Rubin as advisors against McCain’s team led by Carly Fiorina. McCain came across as totally clueless this morning on NBC when he started railing against golden parachutes for CEO’s and then had to claim that he did not know of Fiorina’s $42 million severance package that she got paid to leave HP before she totally destroyed the company with her mismanagement. I can't figure out why McCain would put such a disastrous failure front and center in his campaign in the first place. What does she bring to the table?

It’s going to be hard to pin the tail on the donkeys for this one.

BTW: Why is McCain scaring the old people in Florida by trying to force them to invest all of their retirement funds in the stock market?

The blaming of ignorant poor people argument is over!!!

No one ever said to the banks: make bad loans to ignorant, poor people in bad areas!

If they had taken the applications, checked them out with notations and filed them as refused, they would have had no trouble! Instead they previously were "red lining" whole areas as automatic, "no loans."

Greed, my friend and the fancy instruments that only the creators understand is the cause----that and the administration's refusal to ask for authority, if they needed it, to control such thievery!

"Spreading the blame around to thin it is not the answer. Can a bunch of people---some to jail.
Impeach Bush! We can at least start it.

For what?
I do believe that the financial system is in chaos, and I do believe that simply 'letting people go' is not the solution. The folks who drove these institutes into the ground and allowed these bad loans to go on should be thrown in prison. We saw the writing on the walls YEARS ago. But I'm not sure what you think that President Bush did illegally.

Next, now that SC Fair Tax has crashed and burned, we can expect some of the national FT'ers to come on. I can hardly wait. There is an unspoken agreement here; they pretend it is a serious proposal and I pretend that they aren't pretending.

They kinda remind me of fairy tales, I can't decide though whether they are Peter Pan when poor Tinkerbell is dying crying: “I do believe in faeries...I DO! I DO!” or the hookah-smoking caterpillars that Alice met.

is that IRS will hound the 'little' taxpayer to death, garnish their wages and charge astronomical interest if you owe them a cent. On the other hand, wealthy people or corporations can bargain with them and agree to pay only a fraction of what is owed. This is a disgrace. Money certainly does make the world go around and if you have lots of it the trip is much much smoother. To paraphrase a popular saying "To those who have much, more is given." Sad, isn't it?

According to the Tax Foundation, using figures from the IRS, the top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $364,657) earned approximately 21.2 percent of the nation's income yet paid 39.4 percent of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1 percent of tax returns paid about the same amount of federal individual income taxes as the bottom 95 percent of tax returns. The top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $62,068) earned 67.5 percent of nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86 percent).

Question 1:

Since the wealthy save more that the middle class and those savings will not be taxed (thus reducing the current tax base) until they are spent AND since the FairTax does not tax the poor (thus reducing the current tax base) via the “Prebate” AND since taxes now collected in business to business transactions are exempted from the FairTax (thus reducing the current tax base) AND since used goods are not taxed (thus reducing the current tax base) how can it possibly logically follow that taxes do not go up on the only people left: the middle class?

Question 2:

The FairTax is going to impose a 23% tax on the interest you pay over the prime rate on mortgages and on your credit card debt. Look up HR 25, Section 802 (a)(3)(B)(ii)(I) .. where it says the tax will apply to: “the excess (if any) of the rate paid on such debt over the basic interest rate (as defined in section 805)”

Do you dispute the fact that any interest incurred on car loans, mortgages, credit cards, student loans, etc over the monthly Fed rate is considered taxable as “financial intermediation services.”

Now from the President Bush’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform; and when I mention it all the FTers say that it doesn't consider the FairTax so, quoting from the Advisory Panel’s final report here: “The Panel initially evaluated the federal retail sales tax using the broad tax base described by advocates of the “FairTax” retail sales tax proposal.”

National Retail Sales Tax

The Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform report says that the 22% did not include the cost of the Prebate. Specifically, the report says:

“The Treasury Department calculated that the tax rate required to replace the federal income tax (ONLY) with a retail sales tax would be 22%... This tax rate, however, does not include a program designed to ease the burden of the tax on lower-income Americans.”

Then there is a chart showing the current law vs. the FairTax where everybody’s taxes go up except those people in the highest quintile. (Figure 9.1)

Followed by another chart where everybody’s taxes go up until you earn over $200,000. (Figure 9.2)

Then the President’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform report explains that the FairTax, even without having to raise the money for the “Prebate” would “increase the tax burden on the lower 80% of American families, as ranked by cash income… Such families would pay 34.9% of all federal retail sales taxes, more than double the 15.8% federal income taxes they pay today. The top 20% of American taxpayers would see their tax burden fall… ”

Then, to make matters worse, the President’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform considers the FairTax rate necessary to raise enough money to cover the Prebate.

Quoting from the report: “The Panel considered the cash grant program advocated by proponents of the FairTax. This program (sometimes called a “Prebate”)…required a tax rate, assuming evasion rates somewhat lower than those under the income tax system, would be 34%.”

Question 3:

Do you dispute that everyone's taxes will go up until they reach the $200,000/year rate and if so where is the flaw in President Bush’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform report?

The President’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform pointed out that when Kotlikoff computed the FairTax rate, he assumed that the Federal government would pay the FairTax on all of its purchases BUT when he computed the amount of money the Federal government would need to collect with the FairTax to maintain revenue neutrality he forgot to include the extra costs that the Federal government was paying under the FairTax!

You can use the same link I provided above and then you can search for Box 9.2 in the President’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform for an in-depth explanation of the fraudulent means by which the FairTax proponents calculated their rates.

Question 4:

Do you dispute that the cost of the taxes the Federal government is supposed to pay itself was omitted, and if so why did President Bush’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform report say that they were?

Question 5:

The 23% number has been around for years yet President Bush has increased the size of government by 38% while at the same time presiding over an almost stagnant growth in GDP. Does the 23% figure still hold and if so then how can that possibly be?

Question 6:

Where are the figures that are used to derive the total personal consumption tax base?

Do you have fun doing this?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Don't you enjoy watching it unfold?

The response will be interesting.
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

As usual, the only response to any questioning of the Prebate is of the straw-dog variety. It's not a giveaway! It's not a giveaway! It's a refund! Why, IT'S A PRE-FUND!!! YAY!!!

Point to the spot in my post where I said it was a giveaway.
I understand the theory perfectly. Its the application I believe would be total lunacy.

You can delude yourself into thinking that defining and tracking every US household and dispensing billions in cash to them every month is just a minor expansion of social security, and that all the little details can be easily resolved. You can also believe putting every American household on the federal dole every month would somehow get the government more out of our lives. And you can believe in tooth fairies and that both the South Carolina and Clemson football teams are as good as their preseason ratings.
(Sorry, that last one was a low blow. )

Anyway, your contortions really only proved my point. Thanks.

Well lets see, my house is paid off and I own all my vehicles. So if I understand your slant on the issue, I would get something for nothing. I had a couple telemarketers try to tell me the same thing.

Anyways, are you part of the South Carolina Fair Tax group?
-------------------------------------------
Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Cyclist - I'm baffled by how you can think your receiving something for nothing? If everything you own is paid for your in fantastic shape under the Fair Tax, but your still not receiving something for nothing. You will still have basic necessity expenses that you will need the pre-bate to help cover the tax on, unless you have solar panels everywhere to produce your power (you will still have to pay the Fair Tax when you purchase those NEW panels), use a bicycle or horse drawn carriage to travel, raise all of your food yourself, sheer the sheep or raise cotton and refine it to produce your own clothing, etc. I don't understand what's not calculating for you guys on this Pre-bate? YOU WILL BE PAYING THIS MONEY INTO THE SYSTEM? You will be receiving a portion of that money back, just as you do under the current system, the only difference is that you will get it monthly instead of at the end of the year or by manipulating your W-2. And SO WHAT, you get it at the beginning of the month rather than at the end of the month or end of the year...SO WHAT, after the first month..what's the difference, your paying taxes as you purchase the necessities of life and then being reimbursed the tax on those purchases, HOW IS THAT A HANDOUT? This is no more of a handout than what those people are currently getting when they wait by their mail boxes for their current yearly Tax Returns. To one persons point, if they want to squander their Pre-bate that's their choice, just as they do now under the current system. There is no more "Handing Out" than we already do under the current system.

I'm afraid I can't understand any of your blather:

What is a "your receiving" (your receiving what?
"for your in" (my in?)
"your still" (I don't have one!)
"tax on" (they will)
"your paying" (of bills ?)

So the current system is bad so we will put in another one which is bad?

Why is it that you supporters of the big sales tax instead of an income tax always tell us ignorant people to study and research more and we would agree with you?

Why more? The "books" you mention are the "books." You want I should study them some more?

It is not that complicated. No body wants stuff increased in price from what it is marked by at least one-fourth at the CR!

That is like those stupid ads that say a TV cost $2300 before a refund we will give you sometime, depending upon exactly what you pay for the advertised highest price! There will be no interest on financing this TV for two years, maybe forever, providing you pay at least the minimum amount due every month on the exact day of the month stipulated without fail or postal problems. If anything happens that you don't--even if we don't open your payment up until the time has expired--everything suddenly comes due at once with 23% interest, compounded or the full time explained! Warranties are voided by a late exact payment and can't be paid in advance!
By the time this TV is paid for, it will without doubt be obsolete technically--providing it lasts that long. No one fixes these things so make sure you can afford to throw it away if it fails.

And by the way, we will add 30% to the original sales price without the refund and discount at the cash register!

Can you please help me understand your numbers by explaining how you reached your conclusion? It seems that you are missing other aspects of the Fair Tax that would change your results. If you can't... study HR25 and read the 2 in-depth books on the subject. But from looking at your posted image, I should not be expecting alot from you, it's obvious that you can't be taken seriously.

How Dems view Taxes...
"If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." President Ronald Reagan

I am always happy to help!

Now, let's go to school!

There are four component parts to a gallon of gasoline:

1. The actual crude oil (58%)
2. Federal and state excise taxes (15%)
3. Refining cost and profit (17%)
4. Distribution and marketing (10%)

The above breakdown comes directly from the United States Department of Energy and are current as of 2007, the latest year available. The link to document these numbers is HERE

Now then, "Fair Tax" or no "Fair Tax", the worldwide commodity price of crude oil will not change. "Please Mr. OPEC, we've just implemented a 'Fair Tax', would you please reduce your price 22%?" simply will not work.

As far as Excise taxes go, your beloved HR25 keeps federal excise taxes intact (see Section 302, Section D) so they will remain unchanged.

Therefore, 73% (58% + 15%) of the current cost of a gallon of gas remains the same whether or not a "Fair Tax" is implemented.

Now, let's assume a "best case scenario" (i.e. one that presents the "Fair Tax" in the best possible light) and assume that the cost basis of the remaining 27% is indeed reduced by the "22% embedded taxes" touted by the Boortz gang. With me so far?

I paid approximately $4.00 for a gallon of gas last week. Had the "Fair Tax" been enacted I would have had to have paid $4.88 per gallon.

Here's the math:

• 73% of the cost remains unchanged: $4.00 * .73 = $2.92
• The remaining 27% of the cost is lowered 22% due to "embedded taxes" ($4.00 * .27) * (1 - .22) = 84 cents
• Add those two sums together: $2.92 + .84 = $3.76
• Now calculate the “FairTax” sales tax of 30% (“23% tax inclusive”): $3.76 * 1.30 = $4.88 for a gallon of gas

There you have it!

$4.88 for a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline!

(apologies for the earlier $4.93 figure, I had a rounding error)

Feel free to check my math!

Hope this helps!

Sniffles5,

Although your numbers are essentially valid your premis does not account for the increase in income each of us will realize.
Purchasing power will be essentially the same as now.
The biggest difference we will experience is the simplicity and transparancy of the Federal revenue collection system. The fact that no one will be required to provide personal and financial information to the Federal Government any longer. The transparancy means that if Congress wants to implement any change in the level of tax, every American will be affected and instantly aware of Congress' intent. It is then up to us to shut them down just like we did twice in the last year with their Immigration Reform legislation.

Who are you talking to and what numbers are you questioning?

I read the 2 stupid books. When will # 3 come out to further explain as they learn?

When they want some more money I suppose!

But if you think you can tackle my question, then go for it.

Also, I'm calling you out, I don't believe you read the books.

It is OK with me if you talk to sniffles!

What does "calling you out" mean?
I don't even wear a gun!

What does it mean if I didn't read "the books?" They are trashy money makers who take you for a fool!

I don't believe in a government that protects us from ourselves.

Anti-govt types killed regulation (thanks Phil Graham and John McCain), greed took over like it always does, and people looked at what made the most money the fastest as opposed to what made sense. Those who can't see a need for governing now will never see it.

strictly a boon for people with big wages---nothing else!

No body is fooled!

You just hate to pay taxes!

... I thought you were serious. That's a good one. I just knew you couldn't respond in such an idiotic manner... whewwwwwww. I like your sense of humor.

In all seriousness... I don't hate paying my fair share of taxes, I just hate a tax system that is set up to reward the lazy and underachievers and punishes those that achieve success through hard work.

It's an upside down system.

OK, could we talk a little about "hard work?"

And "underachievers?"

And "rewards?"

What is hard work? How about the guy who delivers Pepsi or Coco-Cola to Kroger? He lifts about six tons in a given day, spending about half his time in the sun or driving a big truck in Atlanta area. He makes in wages somewhere in the area of 30,000 to 45,000 dollars a year. That is, as long as his back, hips, and knees hold out.
He is usually "shot" by 45-50 years of age.
Would you say he works hard? Is he an "underachiever?"

Now let us talk about you?
You probably pound a Blackberry or a PC or an Apple, or talk on a cell phone, or play games or watch the internet, mostly. You fly a lot and rent cars. You have long meetings and talk.
If your company can borrow enough money you are paid about 3-4 times as much as the drink driver! They teach you what you need to know.

Now you probably went to Podunk Normal College. where if you can pay they will shell out a sheepskin in History or something.

Who is lazy, who is an underachiever?

OK, now we have the minority, maybe even illegal, who gets $12 an hour part-time and free emergency room treatment if he has no pride!

Then there is the other minority who has three babies and a welfare check and a rent adjusted place to stay.
Bingo---who you are talking about!

OK, could we talk a little about "hard work?"

And "underachievers?"

And "rewards?"

What is hard work? How about the guy who delivers Pepsi or Coco-Cola to Kroger? He lifts about six tons in a given day, spending about half his time in the sun or driving a big truck in Atlanta area. He makes in wages somewhere in the area of 30,000 to 45,000 dollars a year. That is, as long as his back, hips, and knees hold out.
He is usually "shot" by 45-50 years of age.
Would you say he works hard? Is he an "underachiever?"

Now let us talk about you?
You probably pound a Blackberry or a PC or an Apple, or talk on a cell phone, or play games or watch the internet, mostly. You fly a lot and rent cars. You have long meetings and talk.
If your company can borrow enough money you are paid about 3-4 times as much as the drink driver! They teach you what you need to know.

Now you probably went to Podunk Normal College. where if you can pay they will shell out a sheepskin in History or something.

Who is lazy, who is an underachiever?

OK, now we have the minority, maybe even illegal, who gets $12 an hour part-time and free emergency room treatment if he has no pride!

Then there is the other minority who has three babies and a welfare check and a rent adjusted place to stay.
Bingo---who you are talking about!

Nah, we would make an exception for gas and yachts!

... please remember that the "rich" who buy up all those yachts you speak of, keep thousands of American workers employed around the country.

I have great hope that you take these words and use them to help heal that giant chip on your shoulder.

Everyone is afforded the opportunity to contribute their fair share of the tax burden.

This is a great free country. We are all free to work hard and contribute to society. If this is going to continue to be a great country we ALL have to contribute. The "fair tax plan" ensures that everyone contributes to the country they enjoy. Everyone would pay $4.93 for a gallon of gas.

I realize that not everyone who hears of the FairTax Act will understand it's simplicity and straightforwardness, but, then, you have to realize that there are those who still think the world is flat.

As for whether or not the FairTax will work, my bet is with the groups of non-partisan economists, researchers, think tanks, and financial analysts that have expended over $21 Million dollars to thoroughly research, model, and test the FairTax Act for it's feasibility.

The yokels who seem to be afflicted with Naysayers Syndrome (Good things will NEVER happen here in the United States) do not move me with their lack of intellectual insight, common sense, and knowledge.
I choose to side with economic professionals, analysts, and researchers, even if they are from such institutions as Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and the Cato Institute.

The FairTax will move forward and be enacted by Congress, whether it prevents the great economic crash of the 21st Century, happens during the crash, or is used as a recovery tool after the tax and spend cycles land us in the poor house.

Anyone who says that the FairTax is not fair has either not read the legislation, not read the book, or is just grossly misinformed. Possibly, their judgement is being manipulated by others who would stand to benefit from the current corruption, waste, and squander of the current tax system.

It does not take a rocket scientist to understand the FairTax. Just a little reading and some common comprehension skills. The FairTax is about 132 pages long. The current income tax code is over 69,000 pages and growing every day. Which do you think is "simpler and fairer"?

wnettles

If I earn $1000 and take home $800, how much will my paycheck be after the FairTax is implemented?

Georgia and some other states depend a great deal on sales tax for their income!

Sales are way down right now and they are hurting badly!

Once such a "fair tax" was created, I'm sure it wouldn't be q year until we would have an IRS again or a flat tax on top of the "fair tax."

I have this to say in defense of the FAIR TAX, HR 25 / S 1025... We here in Texas have a state sales tax and it has resulted in NONE! of the dire predictions some have foreseen. There has been no scandal, corruption, or cheating in relation to it. It has funded our state government SPLENDIDLY! We Texans, tourists, illegal aliens, criminals, etc. are all in INSTANT COMPLIANCE!! every time we go through the "cash-register-check-out-line". Virtually no one escapes paying. If it works for Texas it will work for the nation. THINK ABOUT IT MORE... Read and Enjoy... APRIL 15TH????? Let's make it just another Spring day.

HR 25, the Fair Tax Act, is in the House Ways and Means Committee of
congress, waiting to be passed into law. If passed, the Income Tax &
IRS would be abolished and replaced with a national (retail only) sales
tax.

Everyone shoud go to: www.congress.org and tell their congressmen that
they want HR 25 passed into law ASAP!!!! If we all "push together", we
can make it happen. There's nothing to it, BUT TO DO IT!!!!!!

Read and Enjoy.

The FINAL SOLUTION!! for the IRS & Income Tax Problem

50 Reasons I Support the FairTax
(How many reasons can you give for supporting the present obsolete IRS
& income tax system?)

Those Who Know the Facts Love the Fair Tax
"Family Friendly Tax Reform"
Tax Reform with far less pain and much more gain!
Out with the Old Code and in with the New (national RETAIL ONLY sales
tax).

www.fairtax.org

1. It allows you to keep 100% of your paycheck, with nothing withheld
for Social Security and Medicare payments.
2. It eliminates the regressive payroll tax that hurts the poor.
Currently, every one of us is taxed a minimum of 7.65% on our first-dollar of
wages up to $90,000, if we earn that much.
3. It assures that the wealthiest Americans will be voluntarily helping
to fund social security with every last dollar they spend above the
poverty level. Today, earnings are subject to payroll taxes only up to
$90,000. The wealthiest Americans therefore do not pay into the system
above that amount. If their earnings are from investments, no earnings
fund the Social Security system. Under the FairTax, a single purchase
(regardless of the source of the earnings) can result in greater
contributions to the Social Security system than would be paid by an individual
under the payroll tax of today.
4. It provides funding for Social Security and Medicare at a level
equal to or greater than at present, with a stronger and broader tax base.
5. It secures the future of Social Security and Medicare because all
spenders fund it and not just the workers.
6. It eliminates all personal income taxes, payroll taxes, corporate
income taxes, gift taxes, death taxes, and capital gains taxes.
7. It eliminates the income tax and the IRS. Members of Congress and
the public overwhelmingly agree that the current internal revenue code is
cumbersome, intrusive, coercive, and inefficient.
8. It is revenue neutral with the present income tax system, funding
the federal budget at current levels.
9. It will remove an average of 22% of the cost of American made goods
by removing the built-in payroll tax (the other 7.65% of earnings that
employers pay) and other business taxes that are now passed to
consumers as an "embedded" tax of approximately 22% due to the cascading of
income and payroll taxes paid by U.S. employers, at every step of
production, to the U.S. Treasury.
10. It doesn't tax used items ? clothes, cars, homes. Only new items
are taxed when sold by a business to an individual.
11. It is progressive, a "prebate" of the tax amount up to the poverty
level is given to everyone. This means that those spending below the
poverty level have a net gain because the "prebate" exceeds the amount
paid in taxes. (Under the present system they pay the payroll tax even if
they get a full refund of income tax withheld.)

12. It eliminates 90% of the cost of compliance. American families and
American businesses waste an estimated $250 ? $600 billion per year
doing the paperwork necessary to comply with the tax code. That is roughly
$1,000 ? $2,000 annually for every man, woman and child in the U.S.
13. It creates an opportunity for our products to leave this country
costing an average of 25% less, thus increasing our exports, lower our
deficit balance of trade, and increasing employment at home.
14. It encourages investment in companies located in the U.S., thus
providing a home for money already in the US and attracting more. The U.S.
will be the most attractive tax-free haven in the world for doing
business. American companies will return from offshore and overseas.
15. It encourages repatriation to the U.S. of money held by U.S.
individuals and companies now in foreign countries, with no tax consequence.
16. All 290 million Americans and 51 million visiting tourists fund
Social Security and Medicare with their purchases. Today only 110 million
workers fund these programs via deductions from their paychecks.
17. The broader tax base includes the ten percent of our economy, an
estimated $1 trillion, that today is underground or under the table.
Under the FairTax, the illegal drug dealer will pay his tax just like the
rest of us when he buys his sunglasses, BMW, and other items, as will
those who do business for cash.
18. It allows families to save more for home ownership, education, and
retirement. An average family making $50,000 will have $7,500 more
spendable income.
19. It makes educational tuition a tax-free expenditure of tax-free
income.
20. It makes American products more competitive overseas by removing
the embedded tax from them, thus lowering their prices, which compensates
for low foreign wages.
21. It makes American products more competitive at home by removing the
embedded tax from them, compensating for the low cost of imported
products not burdened by taxes imposed by exporting countries.
22. It removes the need for formal 401-K's, IRAs, HSA, etc. Anyone will
be able to set up any kind of savings or investment account without
regard to taxes or the government.
23. It frees churches and other non-profit organizations from the
expense of filing tax returns and paying their half of Social Security and
Medicare payments for employees. There will no longer be any 501.c.3 or
501.c.4 non-profit tax status, because there will be no more tax to be
exempt from.
24. It restores to churches and non-profit organizations the 1st
Amendment right to engage in free speech, without fear of losing their
tax-free status.
25. It gives individuals and businesses the right to donate as much as
they want to in a given year to charitable causes.
26. It restores the 4th Amendment, protecting against unreasonable
searches and seizures, from which the IRS presently is exempt.
27. It restores the 5th Amendment, which guarantees the right to due
process. Under current systems the IRS has their own courts with their
own set of rules not included in the 5th.
28. It cleans up a major flaw in campaign financing, eliminating
campaign donations for "tax favors".
29. It eliminates wrangling in Congress over tax cuts, the tax code,
and who is or is not paying a fair share of the tax bill.
30. It encourages work by letting workers keep 100% of their earnings
and giving a rebate, to boot, making the notion that the more you work,
the more money you have, a reality, unlike the current system where
welfare is lost when you go to work, so your first dollars earned after
taxes just offset what you were currently getting in welfare, making you
no better off.
31. It allows more of the lower income families to become home owners
by allowing a second job income above their current income (all tax
free) to be applied to a mortgage. Money for down payments for homes is
also saved totally tax free so that it will accumulate faster.
32. It allows families to retain farms and businesses in the hands of
those who built them through the elimination of the death tax.
33. It allows families to help each other out tax-free, by eliminating
the gift tax.
34. It encourages individuals to self-insure, making the health system
more direct pay (no 3rd party pay), thus bringing costs down.
35. Without FICA to pay, most states, counties, municipalities, and
school districts will see a large increase in their state budget revenues,
additionally lowering the overall tax burden (State & Federal) for most
Americans.
36. It assures that no American will find, at the end of the year, a
need to get a loan to pay taxes as an alternative to penalties, interest,
or cheating.
37. It restores individual privacy. The government no longer needs to
know where you work, what you are earning, and what you are doing with
it.
38. It eliminates the need to have a "marriage" clarification declaring
who you live with, as that has no bearing at all on a state or federal
sales tax.
39. It eliminates the need for courts to decide which divorced parent
gets to take the tax deduction for children.
40. It reduces production costs for farmers and other subsidized
businesses, leading to a reduction in subsidies, thus reducing the federal
budget.
41. It eliminates the administrative costs incurred by states in
collection of state sales taxes because states will piggyback the state tax
collection onto the national tax collection, for which they are
compensated by the FairTax ?% administrative cost give-back. [Doesn't this go
to the retailers?]
42. It results in a windfall profit for many of those holding taxable
corporate high interest bonds at the time of passage of FairTax, since
they will not be taxed under FairTax. (A higher interest rate is usually
paid to entice investors to buy the corporate bonds rather than go with
the lower interest, but tax free, municipal bonds, now.)
43. It shifts the tax to consumption, which consumption tables over
time show is more stable than income, therefore the tax revenue stream is
likely to be a more stable and predictable amount.
44. It results in Federal Reserve rates being based on current
consumption, which is rather stable, instead of future earnings, which are less
predictable, resulting in surer inflation prevention.
45. It allows for better planning by businesses, because they no longer
have to consider tax implications for everything they do.
46. It makes higher employment or better compensation possible in the
small business sector where today it costs approximately three dollars
in compliance costs to pay one dollar in payroll and income taxes.
47. It moves many now providing tax preparation, advice, accounting,
planning, and records maintenance into an expansive economy where they
will be producing goods and services. There they can add to the standard
of living of all Americans and likely earn more than they do currently,
instead of shuffling paper for the government (and not contributing
anything economically to society).
48. It relieves citizens of the risk of facing the shift in burden of
proof that is so common with the current system, i.e., the taxpayer is
guilty unless innocence can be proved, when even IRS staff sometimes
give conflicting interpretations.
49. It's simple, unambiguous, and certain, the opposite of the current
tax code.
50. It's good for the environment. It reportedly would save about
300,000 trees a year that are needed to produce the paper for the IRS
compliance and tax forms, enough to reach around the equator placed end to
end 28 times. Also, since it taxes only new items, it would encourage
buying tax-free pre-owned cars, clothes, furniture, houses, etc. Reuse is
good for the environment, too.

PLEASE CONSIDER THIS ALSO: 22% of the price of all that you buy currently is tax / tax compliance cost. When that cost goes away (under the Fair Tax) the price of your $1.00 item (purchased at Wal-Mart, for example) drops in price to 78 cents (without damaging the profit margin). 1.23 X 78 cents = 96 cents. Seeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!! Even with the 23% Fair Tax added on, your originally $1.00 item is now 4 cents cheaper. The "out-of-pocket" cost of living , under the Fair Tax , will be no more than it is now. Under the Fair Tax there are NO LOSERS, only winners, the difference being that some win BIGGER!!!! than others due to their increased FRUGALITY.

Best Regards,
John Paul McDaniel

Go to: www.fairtax.org

No General Motors doesn't pay any tax now, so a 35,000 vehicle would cost 35,000 X 1.30 (to add in the unfair tax), making it $41,600.

A $20,000 one = $26,000.

You would get a grocery check monthly (maybe) of a couple of hundred bucks---even Bill Gates.

I suppose China would loan us the money to write those checks by the old IRS employees.

Just have a postcard tax system:

Make less than 20,000 a year : send us $500 down to 15,000, then $100

Make less than 50,000 to 20,000 $2500

Make less than 75,000 to 50,000 $5000

Make less than 100,000 to 75,000 $7500

Make less than 150,000 to 100,000 $15,000

Make over 150,000 $send 15%

No deductions, W2s required.
All Interest payments, stock dividends etc.
to have 15% deducted before issued.

That is all--no exceptions (CORPORATE TAX? Doesn't matter. Boot Leg Wages: Jail Time

Nitpickers,
You must be quite young and had little or no American history in school (which is another problem we face).
Our country started with a flat tax in 1913 with the income tax system that we now deal with. There were other income taxes to fund wars which were subsequently repealed.
The Flat Income Tax quickly became a tool for congress to indirectly tax individuals by taxing corporations and creating a myriad of compliance costs. all which are passed down to the end consumer.
In 1986 Congress passed something as close to a Flat Tax as the liberals would allow under President Reagan. The tax reform of 1986 has been modified in excess of 11,000 times providing us with a healthy 67,000 plus pages to comply with.
The Flat Tax is good in theory but always will lead to a very complex code and the burden of a huge IRS department.
The FairTax legislation defunds the IRS and calls for the States, if they choose, to administer the collection of the FairTax and remit it to the US Treasury. Currently, 45 of the 50 states have a sales tax and the infrastructure to administer it so adding the FairTax collection is not a large burden. The feds end up collecting from 50 states, not 130,000,000 individuals and companies. In total the states collect from approximately 18,000,000 businesses nationwide. The 23% of every dollar collected also compensates the states and the businesses for their administrative costs.
Unlike todays or the Flat Tax systems which permit certain exemptions, that slippery slope is eliminated by the FairTax as there are no exemptions or exclusions.
This in itself is a strong point for implementing the FairTax as it takes away the complexity which allow lobbyists to influence our representatives for loopholes to benefit the lobbyists clients.
And frankly, even if the prices we pay went up 10-15%, Every wage earner brings home 100% of their agreed to wage. Zero deductions. This means that actual purchasing power is not diminished but pretty much the same is it is now. Actually, the average American who is in the 15% income tax bracket now will realize an increase in their take home pay of just over 29%. A 10% tax bracket wage earner will take home 21.4% more wage.
As simple as the FairTax is, it is complicated when trying to visualize the balance of the effects of the income tax VS the RairTax.
Give yourself some time to think on it rather than jumping to immediate conclusions based on an apparent pitfall that you perceive. And don't forget, the FairTax is designed to be revenue neutral to the Government. The prebate makes it a little more favorable to the middle income class and much more favorable to the lower income class of Americans.
I was personally a strong proponent of the Flat Tax when it was first proposed. Congress wouldn't even let it be voted on. They don't want to give up the power they have to do social engineering and receive the benefits of lobbyist money for campaign contributions. After getting a reasonable understanding of the FairTax it was easy to give up hope for the Flat Tax.

I wish I was young. I do know my history, well. Has nothing to do with flat tax of old converting to an income tax!

Are you saying that the "fair" tax does NOT benefit the rich? You didn't mention them!

They won't pay any taxes except on the groceries they buy and the luxuries! They will even get the grocery tax back!

Who is jumping to immediate conclusions? This crap has been floating around for years to no avail!

So you want to get rid of social engineering? Does "fair" do that?

Income is the only way now. Tariffs are the real answer but that has a harder time than "fair" tax does selling itself!

Don't waste any more of people's time with this unworkable thing.

By the way, if all those 15% tax bracket people are going to take home a third more money, who in the world is going to pay the taxes that they now pay? Those poor rich dudes who say they pay it all now?

The Fair Tax really does level the playing field. Job creation will be incredibly strong as the corporations who have fled our current taxation system come back into the U.S.

As far as who will pay the extra taxes, that would be the illegals and the underground economy. Imagine - every time an illegal buys a pair of work boots or a drug dealer gets a new Hummer, 23% comes into the treasury - unavoidable and it is not coming in now.

I'm not sure if you are revealing sarcasm or ignorance old man but the oringinal (1913) income tax was a flat tax. My comments to that effect stand on their own merit. Your history is not that strong.

Re the rich getting the biggest benefit, if that were the case, why aren't the rich clamoring to support the FairTax legislation. With all of the loopholes gone they no longer have the benefit of them and will pay more on their consumption. And I agree with you regarding the tarif and the difficulty in getting it implemented.
The FairTax comes closest to the constitutions direct proportion tax methods. It gives you and I the power to handle our own money as earned. It gives the lower income people the biggest benefit. If you are a full blooded Libertarian type individual I can understand you having a problem with this.
The guy in the 10% tax bracket who wants to improve his lot, works two or three jobs, doesn't get penalized by having his entire income taxed at the 15% level as is now. His earnings and savings is not taxed until spent.
You obviously don't understand the trade-off between the income tax burden and the FairTax otherwise you would not make such a sophomoric statement as the last one.
I might guess that in real life your income is highly dependent on your knowledge of the income tax system. You are an tax accountant or lawyer or corporate Finance Officer or something else whose job may be in jeopardy when the FairTax is implemented.
But like those in the record industry who lost their jobs to the tape cassette who lost their jobs to the CD, like those who built carburators lost their jobs to fuel injection components, you too will need to find other work. You would have a big advantage over those people though, you should be better educated and able to learn a new vocation/profession. Or if you are old enough, retire.
One thing is certain, for our economy to be strong it must be dynamic. Meaning that jobs will come and jobs will go as we evolve to new technology. If all jobs were forever our economy would die.
Last item, the FairTax won't in my opinion really get rid of social engineering. As long as the Fed has the money they can direct it where they want and social engineering is an avenue. However since the FairTax is so transparent and since it is equally applied they can't take more money from you to benefit me. Think on the term "equally applied" and see if you can say that about the income tax.

General Motors, and, every other company that operates here in the United States, pay approximately 23 percent of the retail cost of everything that they sell to the government in the form of embedded taxes. They have to pay for labor, which has income tax embedded in it. They have to pay for materials, which has income tax embedded in it. They have to buy energy, which has income tax embedded in it. They have to pay for contracting services, which have income taxes embedded it them.

So, when you begin calculating how much things are going to cost under the FairTax Act, you should first remove the 23% embedded cost of the income tax, then, add the 23% FairTax amount to the item or service. Goods and services end up costing about the same as they do now, except that the purchaser under the FairTax would have about 23% more usable income to pay for things with.

wnettles

Your comment about GM is slightly incorrect. During testimony before congress in the 1980's, Roger Smith (then head of GM), stated that a Chevy costing about $4300 could be sold for about $2700 without the embedded taxes paid by GM and all of its suppliers. That same premise of embedded taxes, which you have chosen to ignore, applies to some degree in everything you listed making all your numbers incorrect.

Taxing income is counter productive and drives capital away from the US. Without capital investment the jobs so needed by this country are gone as well.

GM had no corporate income tax liability last year. The savings they envision would come from reducing their workers pay which goes to income taxes. Their pay would fall from their present gross pay to their present "take home" pay. Then they would be subject to the FairTax on all purchases.

The FairTax isn't being help up by some Republican/Democratic conspiracy. The politicians just recognize it as silly.

that you are mistaken again. GM does pay embedded taxes(income tax liability), and in many forms. Even though you are again mistaken, I and many others have great hope that you can read and understand the financials that GM has posted on their website.

http://www.gm.com/corporate/investor_information/
docs/fin_data/gm07ar/content/
financials/mda/mda_03.html

The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away.

1. 1.30 should be 1.23 if YOU want to be fair, it's an inclusive calculation.

2. There ARE taxes incorporated into GM's cost structure (embedded taxes on raw materials and other costs) that would be eliminated by implementing the fair tax.

3. Because the US would be the LARGEST TAX HAVEN in the world, bringing increased jobs, employment and all that $$$ that is off shore now, we would not need to borrow from China..or anybody else for that matter.

4. Saving rates would increase greatly providing a larger capital pool.

5. "Boot Leg Wages" exist now.

6. The poor would pay no tax.

7. Bill Gates would still pay more tax than you. (wealth envy?)

8. But, on the other hand, things look pretty swell the way they are now.

If today. Thursday, an item at Kroger cost $1.00, the sales tax is about 7%, or $1.07 for that item. Right?

That is 7% above the cost, but is only 6.5% of the $1.07 sale price!

However, what I paid for the item is an additional 7%!

If you are saying that the item would convert to a sale price (less the tax) of something less than $1.00 after the Fair Tax is incorporated, so that the 7% is added to say .93 cents, then my tax would be .07 X .93 = .065 cents!

Using bigger numbers:

$100.00 = $7.00 dollars tax now = 7%

$93.00 = $6.51 dollars tax = 6.51%

In order for the number for the fair tax to be 23 instead of 30 is for the current prices to be reduced by the amount of the tax!!!!!

Does the proposed law for fair tax say that?

Anyway, it wouldn't matter if the fair tax was 15%, it wouldn't pass congress.

A flat tax by wages above a living amount, with no deductions, would pass. Except for corporations.

If you take the deductions away from corporations they wouldn't build many art houses, libraries, etc. Oprah wouldn't be starting girl's school in Africa that fail!

... the embedded taxes that would be removed from the cost of goods and services. When the embedded taxes are removed, it's THAT new lower cost that the 23% is then added.

The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away.

What tax is embedded in a Chinese steering wheel for a Buick?

A lead painted toy?

That is the beauty of the fair tax plan. Imported toys would be taxed as well.

The illegals will pay, the welfare people will pay, and the rich people will no longer be able to use loopholes to get out of paying. Everyone will pay to live in the country they use and abuse.

Isn't this a great country?!!

Oh, I see, we will have a 30% (23, you say) tariff at the dock?

Now, I am for that! Maybe even 50%!

Or, or, or are you saying no to that, but at retail?

That then doesn't explain all those embedded taxes you speak about!

I didn't speak of the embedded taxes.

I would like to see everyone pay their fair share of the tax burden. Instead of only punishing the people who work in this country, I would like everyone who uses and abuses the benefits of living here to pay taxes.

I'm voting Republican this year for the first time because of the excessive entitlement programs promoted by the dems. We can't all be on welfare.

Here is a good book for you to read bonkers: It is written by Edgar K. Browning a professor of economics at Texas A&M University. Stealing from Each Other: How the Welfare State Robs Americans of Money and Spirit.

"I'm voting Republican this year for the first time because of the excessive entitlement programs promoted by the dems. We can't all be on welfare."

Sooo... Why doesn't Straight-talking John support the fair tax? Why doesn't Sara? It's fair, right?

Because when it's all boiled down, they're politicians. We have more of a chance to change things RE: taxes with McCain/Palin then with Mr. no-change Obama. Politicians derive all power from the IRS and the tax laws. What we have now DAMN sure dosen't work. So, all you lib's screaming for change, start here....abolish the IRS and institute the Fair Tax. This is the absolute best way for the people to "take back the country" from these ruthless, power hungry pols. Open your eyes. It's so obvious.

I think maybe the banks are bigger robbers than the sorry, no good, ignorant peons that we should gather up and shoot!

The bankers have to pay off their masters in the Dem party. (see Obama, Clinton, Rangle, Schumer, Sharpton, Jesse, etc)The Dem cronies are running the banks or are now on Obama's change squad. Still, you shouldn't want to shoot ANYBODY. Get some therapy.

Bonkers, it's obvious you are a hater of ANYTHING related to conservatism or President Bush. The tone in and your choice of words all are symptoms of the hate you have for the success that surrounds our lives, while you dribble in failure. You won't change.

A loser is just a loser... but I guess you are used to it. I would call you an idiot, but even with idiots there is hope, there is no hope for you.

The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away.

... back up your statements with factual references. You keep spewing the same old tiring garbage that Liberal weenies spew when you have nothing to back up their lack of knowledge on the subject.

Look at the FairTax supporters in this blog... they give detailed specifics that back up their position, while the dejectors rant and show off their very bad math skills. The economist and mathmeticians at Harvard, Yard and other respectful sources can do a bit better math that those posted here.

The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away.

"... back up your statements with factual references. You keep spewing the same old tiring garbage that Liberal weenies spew when you have nothing to back up their lack of knowledge on the subject."

Since you have not been paying attention, I am posting for you my previous blogs on the subject.

If and after you catch up get back to me about my lack of knowledge on the subject. And please pay attention to the number of times I asked the FairTaxers the same questions over and over without getting an answer.

Shelby, Gene, Don and the FairTax

FairTax Follies

FairTaxers Gene or Don help me out here

Giving up on the FairTax argument

10 FairTax questions for dculling

Disappointed in FairTaxers response

Words don't "back-up" anything. Just words.

Experience is the only back up!

Bonkers, what experience are you talking about? Am I missing something... have we once had the National Fair Tax in place in our nations history? Ummm, I must have missed it.

The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away.

JeffC says that "Some of you people will believe anything." I think that JeffC is correct in that folks like himself believe that our current tax system is fair and simple.

He also seems to believe that We, the People of this great country are no longer capable of going to the voting booth and making the changes necessary to move such a fair and progressive capitalist revenue collection system as the FairTax from the research department into law.

I would rather believe that we can and will make positive change for our future and our children's future. The FairTax is the Real Thing and needs to be enacted and implemented as soon as possible. Anything less would be just another excuse.

wnettles

Its really easy to attribute silly stuff to people then ridicule it. Much harder to argue with what I actually say.

Click here wnettles

Follow the links.

BTW: Still waiting for your answer to see how much you understand about the FairTax: If I earn $1000 and take home $800, how much will my paycheck be after the FairTax is implemented?

The most profound changes in society are generally met with the most resistance. As more and more groups are effected by the declining economic conditions (retirees whose investments are now losing value, people who are living on disability checks that do not increase with the cost of living, and our young people who will soon gain enough maturity to realize that ideals are not enough to keep food on the table), they will soon realize that our choices are becoming more limited. We can either turn to the government who has already illustrated that the will to achieve wealth and power trumps any responsible forethought; or choose to take responsibility for their own destiny. The Fair Tax makes that possible.
The alternative is more governmental control, increasing taxes and the decline to socialism. A strong world economy is dependant upon a strong US economy.
Here is another idea that was not very popular when introduced by your father that deserves another chance. ZERO BASED BUDGETING!!

Bonkers,

Ignoring your incendiary address ("Idiots"), what part of "Revenue Neutral" do you not understand with regard to the FairTax? Or have you even read up on exactly what kind of receipts the FairTax would generate for the government?

Assuming you haven't, the amount of money raised via retail consumption taxes at a federal rate of 23% would match what we collect today through our arcane income tax system.

So if you're of the opinion that taxes must be raised to pay for bailouts, etc., then what exactly is your point? We'd either raise income taxes or raise the FairTax sales taxes. Either way, it's a tax increase.

By the way, the government is selling bonds, not raising taxes, to pay for these outlays right now. I'm not saying I agree with the concept of mortgaging the future for present-day bailouts, but to suggest that the FairTax is less adept at raising revenue than an income tax is misleading.

Furthermore, if you're really trying to be a champion of the poor, all congress would have to do under the FairTax is raise the prebate level such that tax increases target the rich people you evidently deplore.

Illegals by the hundreds have gone back to Mexico and points south, so they won't be helping with the contributions to the Fair Tax. But the drug dealers and other undergrounders would.

How? Well they don't actually pay taxes now - do they? But under a Fair Tax scenario they would pay 23% on every Pepsi (no druggies don't drink Coke) and Big Mac they purchase with their ill-gained cash.

1- Mr. Small Businessman will gladly do all the bookkeeping that is necessary to forward to the national government his particular share of the national sales tax. The entire barter economy will fall into line in support of this new, lower form of taxation.

2- The problem of our current tax structure is that the deadbeats out there are not paying their fair share while the hard working corporations of this country are being stifled. And the income percentages are all wrong when they not the great discrepancy between income increases for the upper 10% bracket versus the lower 90% brackets.

In our next lesson, we will explore the state of creeping socialism within our economy with particular emphasis on the fair tax "Pre-bate" and the creation of the NEW welfare state.

Keep the faith.

Democracy is not a spectator sport.

READ the books, Bonkers!! It will revive this economy like nothing else! I have very little hope that it will ever be passed (due to most of our "representatives" in Washington wanting to keep the power there) but it will be the best thing for our economy.

You never did answer my question about the FairTax:

If you make $1000 and take home $800, how much would you take home after the FairTax goes into effect?

As long as books can be sold on this unanswerable tax stuff, they will keep it up. High income people who pay taxes (some don't) want it badly at any expense to others.

I just had a guy do some work around the house for me. He did a good job so I paid him and I tipped him.
Do you think that I would have been charged by him the 22% or the 30% extra so that he could "send it in?"

Of course not, nor would Adams farm for a sweet potato!

Of course that is illegal in reality, but what difference does that make---it is done now by the ton! Do I have to keep records of the work I have done and send that in?

You barter with your employer to detemine your wage. The employer pays you the agreed upon amount. His payroll expense already includes the gross amount of your wages plus the additional contribution for social security and medicare and any agreed upon fringes. He can, therefore, pay you your entire gross wage and still save his contribution of 7.9% plus the cost of the employee that must calculate and report the wage to the federal government. I would venture to say that he would not cut my wage and if he did, he would answer for his actions. I would get my $1000 he saves $79.00 in payroll expenses plus the cost of the payroll clerk. Question answered.

The whole logic behind the FairTax is that embedded taxes would be eliminated. The withholding in your paycheck is the largest part of those embedded taxes. Your employer cannot at the same time continue to pay your withholding and reduce reduce his embedded tax costs. You can't have both.

You would take home $800.

Look here for the words straight from the FairTax people and Neal Boortz, with links:

It sounds ridiculous mudcat

The embedded taxes to which you refer are the costs that the company must expend to provide its goods or services which include: payroll taxes, state taxes, local taxes, federal taxes, fuel, supplies, compliance costs, etc. The business owner must increase the cost of his goods to accomodate the increased cost of doing business (expenses). If the expenses to the business owner are reduced..as in payroll taxes and corporate income taxes..then he can afford to sell his goods for less. This is what they refer to when they reference "embedded taxes". The embedded taxes are not at issue when discussing an employee's take home pay.

You totally ignored the quotes and links I provided which prove that you are wrong and where I cited quotes and articles from the FairTax people themselves.

Here's part, again:

Dr. Jorgenson was asked specifically about the question of whether or not people’s paychecks would be reduced from their gross pay amount to their net pay amount.

Dr. Jorgenson replied: “A more reasonable interpretation of my 1996 testimony is that workers would keep that after-tax pay; producers' prices would fall, but retail prices would be increased by the national retail sales tax.”

AFTER TAX PAY!

Asked to further clarify so that there could be no misinterpretation as to the specific question: “when you say "workers would keep that after-tax pay" are you saying that if they are making $1000 a week now, and paying $200 payroll+income taxes now, that under the FairTax you were assuming that workers would get paid $800 and keep all of that? Or are you saying that you meant they would make $1000 under the FairTax?”

Dr Jorgenson responded: “I am saying that the worker would continue to receive the after-tax amount of $800.”

Is it your position that FairTax founder Dr. Jorgenson is wrong?

You must admit that current economic conditions and tax code elminate the small business owner or sole proprietor from effectively competing with the cash rich corporate entities who can afford to pay accountants, lawyers and lobbyist to sway politicians (both parties are guilty) to manipulate the tax code to favor the group that garners the most support. Our current economic situation is a direct result of the current system in action. The Fair Tax would even the playing field for the average citizen and encourage enterprise and competition from the "Mom and Pop". Prices of goods would drop because competition would be leveled, jobs would return to America because it would be inviting to do so, and political corruption held in check. If anyone can come up with a better idea, then I will listen most attentively. But as it stands now, I lack faith in either political party and am openly astonished by the massive debt we have amassed and that we choose to ignore the serious problems our country now faces. I and other American citizens will be watching closely as both of these jokers dance around the real issues. WE ARE LOOKING FOR REAL "CHANGE".

Everything you say may be true.

My whole point is that the FairTax proposal is a hoax. It will never be implemented. It will never even come up for consideration in committee. There will never be any kind of vote on it. Forget the mathematics of it. The politicians know that when people find out that their pay goes down to their take home pay, gasoline goes up by almost a dollar, that the FairTax applies to rent and that the interest above the prime rate on all loans, including mortgages, is subject to the tax, its a political death sentence. It is just not going to happen.

I'm sure the truth is somewhere in the middle on this. But I'm curious, why do you only see wages being cut, and not the cost of goods due to imbedded taxes? That seems to be your argument, that pay will go down, and the costs of products will go up? I could see them both going down myself somewhat.

ALL that being said, the reason this bill will possibly not see the light of day, is POWER. The Politicians DO NOT want to give up POWER, they can now manipulate the tax codes to produce a desired results.