Posted on 06/25/2004 11:49:59 AM PDT by balrog666
The crucifiction example was priceless. Do you want to carry your cross to the hill or shall we put it there for you. The only problem is the correct analogy is do you want to drag it or pull it.....like it matters.
The plan is for 29.87% right now. And that not even generating the same revenue they are now.
Also, you'll be paying the feds through your state and local governments (they pay sales taxes on their purchases too - be we all know that governments don't pay for anything, we do).
Ditto. On that point we can wholeheartedly agree.
His point was that if the federal government kept spending to constitutional limits, any tax system used to support it wouldn't be oppressive in the first place.
And no.... the price would zero out or even be less than current. The rates I've heard kicked around are at the 25-28% range. Knock out all the crap currently needed to keep up with an increasing foobar tax scheme, not to mention the taxes themselves, would drop the price of things by more than what the added back in sales tax would be.
I've seen numbers bandied around by NRST opponents that try to fog the matter by twisting it to apply to their examples more like a VAT tax. Don't do that. That would be plain old stupid.
Then I should be exempt because I don't need reminding. Look, the NRST is a big rip-off for anyone with savings. They paid taxes earning and saving their wages, now they'd have to pay taxes on spending them too.
Listen to Willie Green-- he's right.
OUCH
[oops, sorry, I just fell off my chair]
By necessity they would meld into one. within a short time it would look alot like the current one.
How many people cuss the oil companies for high prices without first cussing gov't taxes? We all pay over $.50 tax on a gallon.
How many people cuss the supermarkets for high food cost without first cussing gov't sales taxes? We pay between 5% to 10% on every item.
IMO national sales tax is a horrible idea because there is no accountability. The politicians always tell us that the money goes for education or healthcare which is pure dung beetle juice. I've rarely seen a tax roll back.
If the national sales tax is sure to be enacted though, now's the best time to set up a non-profit corporation to dodge taxes. The day that occurs there will be a flood of ordinations LOL.
It won't fix the spending problem for sure, but it would give more people more freedom back than they have ever gotten in one fell swoop since the revolution. Did he address that?
Also, virtually never discussed is that your paycheck will be 100% of your earnings (other than state). NO DEDUCTIONS! No income tax, no FICA, etc...
I support both the NRST and a Flat Tax. Either is preferrable to what we have now. And an amendment to the Constitution repealing the income tax is also needed, along with a 2/3rds majority to raise taxes.
But the spending problem needs to be brought under control and fast or all will be lost.
Yep. I look forward to the transcript of all the talk about unions too; that Teamsters weasel that called up was such a joke.
I am not sure about other socialist countries but in Japan they have corporate tax, income tax and a national sales tax. The people still support socialism.
As Dr. Williams said, even if we paid zero taxes the government could still spend money by printing it, and the results would be the exact same, less buying power. The only solution is to reduce spending. However, we will have another civil war or revolutionary war before the size of government is significantly reduced.
How exactly would the NRST rate be determined?
How do we know the rate won't be "adjusted" in the future?
What products would fall under the NRST?
Who would "manage" the system?
They already pay taxes spending that money. And the tax on savings, investment, and EARNINGS would ALL be eliminated.
Under the Fair Tax Act (HR 25),
1. The operating costs of the IRS would be reduced more than 90%.
2. The cost of complying with income tax reporting requirements would be reduced by over 90% (amounting to several hundred billion dollars per year).
3. No one would have to report their income or their expenses, or keep records to prove to IRS auditors what your intentions are in conducting your personal affairs.
If that is not reducing significantly the cost and intrusive powers of government, I must not be able to recognize what that really means. Enaction of the Fair Tax Act, in and of itself, would do more to reduce the federal government's power and expense than any other action in my lifetime. Let's get with it!!
How? They would not have the power to or need to audit individuals as they do now, nor companies tax returns because there wouldnt be any. Tax compliance would be easy to determine. Gross sales x tax rate = amount owed. Done.
The plan I have read wanted a 23% rate.Well, if you believe you would pay an additional 23% more than the price of your purchases, you've been had. The 23% is the "tax inclusive" rate. The real tax rate is 28.87%.
Not to mention the hidden costs due to the tax code, farm bill, etc...
If the national sales tax is sure to be enacted though, now's the best time to set up a non-profit corporation to dodge taxes.
Ahhh, how would doing that avoid sales taxes? Profits would NOT be taxed, retail transactions would.
Sorry, the real rate is 29.87%.
I don't think the NRST is the best solution, but it may be the only one that is possible to get implemented.
Plus I like the idea of nailing the black market and tax evaders.
What amount of a $100 product today is taxes (hidden in the retail price because companies pay no taxes, consumers pay them)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.