FAIRTAX, FLAWED TAX?

Nealz Nuze/WSB Radio ^ | August 27, 2007 | Neal Boortz

[Phantom Lord]

You can make it flatter, and simpler. That would be a good thing

As was done in 1986. How flat and simple did it stay and for how long?

[xcamel]

welcome to the “my way or the highway” (FT) tax advocates. It’s pointless to even discuss it.

[Turret Gunner A20]

RE: # 46

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq

# 34. Could we end up with both the FairTax and an income tax?

No current supporter of the FairTax would support the FairTax unless the entire income tax is repealed. Moreover, concurrent with the repeal of the income tax, a constitutional amendment repealing the 16th Amendment and prohibiting an income tax will be pushed through Congress for ratification by the states (filed as HJR 16 in the 109th Congress).

[Phantom Lord]

Your company is still paying that extra $20,000. In a FairTax world, it will save that money, and be able to lower its prices accordingly, only if it can reduce your salary to $80,000. In other words, your take-home pay is the same as before. Sure, you'd get to "keep 100 percent of your paycheck," as Boortz and Linder repeatedly write, but it would be a smaller paycheck. That's kind of a big thing to leave out.

Lets see. I make $100,000 today but my take home pay is $80,000. Tomorrow the FairTax is implemented and my take home pay is $80,000.

The difference is and I am worse off how?

[Phantom Lord]

I know all that. But at the end of the day, without the repeal of the 16th Amendment, I can not support the FairTax because we will have both.

I can not support or fall for the "once the Fair Tax is passed we will work on repealing the 16th amendment" or "we will get it repealed in the future." Because it won't happen.

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

check it out

http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/TheFairTaxAndEconomicGrowth.pdf

[GeorgefromGeorgia]

http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/MacroeconomicAnalysisofFairTax.pdf

[Turret Gunner A20]

RE: $ 52

# 51 applies to you , too.

[Always Right]

Lets see. I make $100,000 today but my take home pay is $80,000. Tomorrow the FairTax is implemented and my take home pay is $80,000. The difference is and I am worse off how?

The problem is that is not how it works in the real world. In the real world there is no mechanism to reduce the wages from $100K to $80K, so wages stay at $100K. Well you say, what is wrong with that? That means prices can't come down nearly enough to offset the tax. After tax, prices have to rise about 20%, which is fine for all those people earning income because they are taking home more money. But for people who are retired, they have just seen the purchasing power of their next egg drop 20%. Huge problem for retirees.

[Phantom Lord]

Sure, you'd get to "keep 100 percent of your paycheck," as Boortz and Linder repeatedly write, but it would be a smaller paycheck. That's kind of a big thing to leave out.

Here is an experiment for you to do. Go ask 50 people "how much do you earn?"

Better than 95% will respond "I take home $X" or some close variant of that.

I did mortgages for 10 years. One of the hardest questions to get answered accurately was "gross monthly income". Hardly anyone knew.

But they could all tell me exactly how much their take home pay was.

[Always Right]

You must be the latest paid for fairtax poster. What do they pay anymore to spam FreeRepublic. They were giving about $800 a month several years back.

[Turret Gunner A20]

RE: # 53

why? you’re doing just fine with your buddies posting them all...

Then, by that logic, shut up -- other nincompoops on the board are sniping mouthing the same tripe you two use.

[Dan Walsh]

With so many layers of taxation built in, it will take about 2 years for the market to completely them out of the end product pricing!

[WileyC]

What the hell do you think he's going to do? He's going to drop his prices. That's why it is stupid for his competitor to drop his prices. If they get into a price war, they both lose. They would both be better off leaving prices where they are.

Good lord, that comment is ignorant. By that argument there would never be ANY price competition. And yet it happens ALL THE TIME. Therefore your argument is false.

Look at from the other side. Every business that lowers their price to match their lowered costs (i.e. there is NO LOSS to the business), gets a chance to increase market share. Simple, eh? If you don't believe in this, you basically don't believe in free markets or capitalism and don't really belong in a discussion of either.

[Turret Gunner A20]

RE: # 54

Rule 1: Never argue with an idiot.

Bless your little low-IQ heart. I agree with that. But it's so much fun watching you clods make fools of yourselves that I can't resist doing so.

[Phantom Lord]

In the real world there is no mechanism to reduce the wages from $100K to $80K, so wages stay at $100K.

So my boss couldn't pull me into his office and say, Phantom, we are reducing your salary to $80K a year starting tomorrow? That mechanism doesn't exist?

[xcamel]

Maybe you should start to question your position then - unless you really feel that "everyone else" is a "nincompoop" (sic)

[Always Right]

So I post a sourced quotes from two experts, one was the chief expert whose work was financed by the fairtax organization, and you ignore it and continue your mindless insults. You are a piece of work along with most of the other fairtax supporters.

[3niner]

It's amazing how people get hung up on the rate for a fair tax. It should be obvious that honest people will mostly end up paying less, with a consumption tax, than with an income tax. This can be reasoned out as follows:

Most criminals are tax evaders. They do this by not reporting income. A consumption tax is applied to everything you buy, and requires one to make every purchase from alternate (illegal) sources in order to evade it. This is much harder to do.

[Phantom Lord]

With so many layers of taxation built in, it will take about 2 years for the market to completely them out of the end product pricing!

But the FairTax opponents claim that embedded taxes aren't all that much. Why would it take so long to weed them out?