Posted on 01/13/2008 5:16:11 AM PST by Man50D
Learn some HONEST history instead of the propaganda they feed you in public school these days!
You notice how they all act like skunks at the feed bin? Give them the slightest nudge in the wrong direction and they spread stink all over the thread... I think its a plan on their behalf to make sure anyone with serious questions/reservations about the FT won’t stay around long enough to give them any trouble...
That is it?
That is your best shot?
it tickles.
The fact is we have shown you and yours to be big government marxists with this fair tax scam. Again and again it is clear you have not even READ H.R. 25 or understood the legal implications contained in it, OR the tried and true methods for legally avoiding the 30% sales tax. (offshoring, finance shifting, internet puchasing, leasing vs purchasing, staw sales to create “used”, demo model aging...)
You call the IRS marxist, but it is more a case of you the Marxist advocate calling the kettle black.
Nobody here has ever expressed love to the IRS, you only use that pathetic retoric as a goeblesesque desperation to cover your repeated failure to address reality. The IRS must go but the blind incompetence of the scammers like bortz, prevents a truly viable solution being put forth.
You constantly obfuscate past history which documents this will not and can not work in any way shape or form. That similar such programs have been ecconomic and social catastrophies. (jobs and business lost form 1991 luxury tax, social fiasco of the Great Society socialism, etc.)
Na zdorovia Comrade, enjoy your Kool-aide.
For about the 40th time, get over yourself.
..blaming the MSM for your failure to evangelize the most pitiful propaganda campaign ever.. I can't wait for the tears... oh wait.. you already did that sthick..
1. Limit spending
2. Pay off the national debt.
3. Repeal the 16th amendment.
4. Amend the constitution to forbid social engineering.
5. Replace all legislators that ignore the constitution, especially the bill of rights.
Now any tax system would theoretically work.
What do you think?
Do all that and leave tax collecting to the Salvation Army...
Hey.. it would work better than the unfair tax...
Ever hear of the Whiskey Rebellion?
1. Limit spending
2. Pay off the national debt.
3. Repeal the 16th amendment.
4. Amend the constitution to forbid social engineering.
5. Replace all legislators that ignore the constitution, especially the bill of rights.
Now any tax system would theoretically work.
What do you think?
Limit borrowing, and demand Congress include funding for any new spending bill (either a cut somewhere else, or a plan for raising the necessary revenue). Any changes to a bill that includes spending pushes back the voting date to give all in Congress time to revue the bill. Believe it or not, the founding fathers were not adverse to a little social engineering via taxation, neither are FairTaxers.
I do like your suggestion to replace legislators that ignore the Constitution and assume that wouldn't go into effect until after your amendments are passed. However, because the Constitution gives the SCOTUS the job of resolving Constitutional issues, don't you think your plan gives them too much power?
It's the raising of revenue that starts the increase in taxation or deficit spending. The spending should be set to a maximum rate not to exceed say 10% of GDP. The founding fathers may not have understood the extent that libs were willing to go with social engineering. I dare say they wouldn't have thought it necessary to capture votes vs the good of the people.
RE: Hamilton "I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
“In the real world, software has replaced much of the work of the company CPA.
bookeepers compile the data for most of the year and the tax returns are simply signed off by the CPA firm as a means of double checking the work.
Software has reduced the need CPA billings significantly.”
Is that why every independent analysis has shown that compliance costs continue to rise year after year?
Tax returns aren’t merely “signed off on” by CPA firms. Tax return preparation involves a substantial amount of billable hours. That does not even count tax planning, which can often dwarf the actual tax return preparation. For example, I did some consulting for a manufacturing operation a few years ago. They were a subsidiary of a foreign company whose US sales had been increasing to the point that they decided to bite the bullet and build a plant here, rather than continue to ship stuff in from overseas to meet sales demand. They were not yet profitable, but hoped to be in another couple of years as sales continued to ramp up. For the previous year, they had reported a $2.3 MM loss. As I was looking over their financials, I noted that they spent about $500K on consulting. I was told that that was primarily for tax planning with their Big 6 CPA firm. So here was a company which didn’t even have profits to shelter from taxation (yet) spending that kind of money. They would have “only” lost $1.8 MM without that expense. Some on these threads have stated that only profitable companies incur expenses of our tax system. That is simply not true. And your assertion that computers can handle all tax related matters and that compliance costs are dropping as a result is demonstrably false.
“The fact is we have shown you and yours to be big government marxists with this fair tax scam.”
No, you haven’t. You have made that assertion, but you have offered nothing except your own opinions. That’s fine; this is an opinion board. However, as my tagline says, my posts aren’t restricted by those opinions and neither are the other FT supporters on here. I know that is a difficult concept for you and your SQL buddies to grasp, but that’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
Ever heard of John Dillinger?
Yep! In fact, I actually know something about it unlike you apparently!
Was it a consuption tax, or an inscome tax?
It was an excise selectively imposed on growers of certain grains which had been converted to distilled spirits in order to ease transportation and other such concerns at the time. The rebellion was about the SELECTIVE nature of the imposition in that it taxed growers of this type of commodity while growers of other commodities went untaxed.
I thought it was an excise paid by the distiller, who was often the grower too. Small distillers were required to pay a tax per gallon while large operations paid a lower flat rate.
The point is that the tax was an excise tax, not an income tax.
No! The point is the SELECTIVE nature of the imposition in that it taxed growers of some commodities while growers of other commodities went untaxed.
I suppose you're correct in that it taxed growers who converted their grain into whiskey, but it only taxed their "commodity" when it was converted to whiskey (isn't that why it was called a "whiskey tax").
Or, perhaps you're claiming that the citizens of our new country would have happily accepted a tax on all transactions, but objected to a tax that fell on a single item? But, does that make sense? Certainly Americans could easily avoid the whiskey tax making it entirely a voluntary tax.
Liberty, Property, and NO SALES TAX!"
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.