[Dead Corpse]

Actually, he is part right. An NRST without spending reform is meaningless as far as reigning in government spending. What it DOES accomplish, besides being much more equitable, is make everyon more aware of the cost and burden of unchecked government spending.

You got a problem with that?

[sam_paine]

It does not promote awareness to the dolts that don't pay attention.

They will just see prices go up and blame Bush (or whomever it is at the time.)

[SoDak]

Exactly. The left's big fear about this is that once everyone is paying at least a little of this tax, it becomes MUCH harder to raise it. It's too easy for people to lose part of their check and not think about it. They lost money they didn't even have, so it's painless to sheeple that don't stop and think about it. Pop for the tax while you're buying a new couch, and it becomes a WHOLE lot harder to support the next raise in taxes. I support the NRST.

[CyberCowboy777]

Most people have no comprehension of the cost of government, the NRST would remind them at every purchase.

[gargoyle]

...If the Fed. gov't respected the constitution from the beginning, we wouldn't be wasting time on spending reform. That's the problem...

[balrog666]

You got a problem with that?

At a rate of 30-50%??? You're d@mn right I do.

[Hostage]

It also provides for more privacy. The way the income tax isnow structured, there is virtually nothing that the Federal government doesn't have access to regarding health, property, family and business.

Of course in the current terrorism environment, privacy appears subordinate to government surveillance.

I do not have a problem with the current administration knowing my personal affairs, but I dread the next Clinton type presidency where the IRS is used for political purposes.

[redangus]

My sentiments exactly. It also means everyone in the country helps foot the bill for the benefits bestowed by the government. No free lunch.