Posted on 01/09/2005 6:59:57 PM PST by ancient_geezer
"That said, the AMT is an abortion of an abomination of an atrocity, both in principle and in execution. Off with its head!"
Which the FairTax, but not the flat tax, does.
"We don't need to be reminded about how bad the 'Rats are."
It may surprise you to know that the rate of growth is actually accelerating and the last four years under republican leadership have seen the largest increases in the tax system (both in absolute and percentage terms) in history. This isn't about partisanship. It is about a system of taxation that was fundamentally flawed from its inception and that gets worse and worse with each passing year.
If this is true would it not attract companies from all over the world to move here? Jobs?
The guys promoting NRST most strongly are businessmen who are leveraged in the proposition, in other words.
And anyway, after several years of accumulation, they can just sail away to the Caymans, renounce their citizenship, and enjoy their killings NRST-free.
This, on the surface, is a form of class warfare. I know you don't fit that role, but what is wrong with the rich getting richer if the unrich are getting richer too?
"And anyway, after several years of accumulation, they can just sail away to the Caymans, renounce their citizenship, and enjoy their killings NRST-free."
[You, responding] This, on the surface, is a form of class warfare.
No, it isn't. Class warfare is, "soak these schlubs, I hate them and they're evil."
What I said was, the tax is improvident politically and in equity and is subject to evasion by decamping dollarati.
I know you don't fit that role, but what is wrong with the rich getting richer if the unrich are getting richer too?
The premise is faulty. How do the unrich get richer if their discretionary income is going to pay the portion of the overall federal tax burden now shouldered by thousands of businesses that pay income and payroll taxes?
But let's assume arguendo that even the unrich begin to, or continue to, accumulate wealth. Very well. What is the equity of exempting business enterprises from taxes that otherwise fall on other accounts with TIN's that happen to be paid into by individuals? Why create a tax-privileged class of entities that can appear in court, enjoy many of the rights of individuals (except, someone attempted to assert -- laughably, in the face of 30 years' worth of business-PAC activity and 215 years of lobbying -- for political rights), and are in fact treated in business law as "persons"?
Think about it like this: Businesses are entities that provide jobs and collect taxes. Who do they collect those taxes from? Customers by hiking prices, employees by lowering wages, the business bottom line by making less profit.
1) Flat tax: prices lower, good.
2) Flat tax: take home pay higher and no affect on wages, good.
3) Bottom line higher, good. More companies relocate here and hire American workers.
Think about what you said.
Also, remember Jack Kemp's adage: a rising tide lifts all boats. Please cut and paste the link:
http://www.freedomkeys.com/gap.htm
You were attempting to make the point that taxes would cascade. The tax is paid by the consumer and remited directly to the state, which woudl remit the tax to the fed. It would not bu included in the cost of his service, and therefore not cascade as you, through, what I believe was intentional misrepresentation, suggested.
You are concerned with getting your friend through the short term. My suggestion of paying the mortgage down was geared toward that. That would help him avoid taxes. Paying off your house is a sound, conservative financial strategy. Not paying 6-8% interest on a mortgage is better than investing in what is now a generally flat market, and could be for some time, unless tax reform unleashes capital to the markets.
You mean like diapers, milk, food, health insurance, prescription medication, gasoline, car insurance, electric bill, gas bill, clothing for five kids, shoes for the kids, occasional date with the wife?With 5 kids, this guy will get reimbursed for taxes on these types of essentials. Plus he will bring home bigger paychecks without the FICA deductions.
News flash - there is no federal estate tax. At least for now. And working with President Bush, we hope to eliminate it permanently.
That would be nice, but there are plenty of forces aligned against making it permanant, so I'll believe it when the President signs it.
Just generally speaking (as someone who has 4 kids and doesn't pay much tax now), I am fully behind the Fair Tax. The efficiencies, the privacy advantages, the promotion of savings and investing and capital formation, and the visability are vastly superior to our current system.
Unless you're lewislynn.
Remind me to never purchase anything from lewislynn and his business. He would charge the NRST on state and local taxes, and end up keeping the return to him after the state administrators send his excess remittance back.
Wonder if he charges state retail taxes on local taxes in his business now, as he say he would with the NRST?
My boss passed away in 2000. We had to pay over $10 million in estate taxes. His widow is elderly and on her last legs. When she dies we expect to pay another $7 - 8 Million. That's money we could be using for the business.
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.