Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FairTax cut for 2-parent families
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | January 19, 2008 | Howard and Raymond Richman

Posted on 01/20/2008 6:29:07 AM PST by Man50D

During an election season, one of the first losers is the truth. The current misinformation campaign against the FairTax has been particularly virulent. Last month the FairTax was being panned by some columnists as a "crackpot scheme," even though it could be collected exactly the same way as its close cousin, the value-added tax, which is the most successful tax in the world. This month the FairTax is being vilified by various columnists as a tax increase for the middle class, even though it would provide a substantial tax cut for two-parent middle class families. Specifically, in a recent column, George Will asked, "Do you want a president (Mike Huckabee, proponent of a national sales tax of at least 30 percent) pledged to radically increase the proportion of federal taxes paid by the middle class?" Similarly, Time magazine's business and economics columnist Justin Fox wrote a blog piece entitled, "The FairTax and its big break for the $200,000-plus crowd."

The FairTax is a national sales tax that would replace the income taxes, the payroll taxes, and the gift and inheritance taxes. It would be a 30 percent sales tax on retail purchases. Since 30 cents is 23 percent of $1.30 (the amount you would pay on a $1 item), a 30 percent FairTax would cost you about 23 percent of your consumption. To help you pay the tax, you would get a prebate check or a debit card credit at the beginning of each month equivalent to the amount you would pay when buying necessities. In 2007, that amount would have been based upon $10,210 spending per adult and $3,480 spending per child.

(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 621-636 next last
To: Nextrush

a system with a sucess penalty with at its heart a monthly check based on “from each according to their ability to each according to their needs”

suuuuure keep drinking that kool-aide.

you might as well call the Fair Tax Scam “New and improved Marxism Lite”

(and no trans fats too!)


61 posted on 01/20/2008 9:05:39 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

Newsflash even with a flat tax system you would still need the same people to manage the flow of money.


62 posted on 01/20/2008 9:16:07 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: crz
They fear that they might have to actually pay a constitutionally LEGAL tax.

Which clause does the monthly federal debit card payment come under?

63 posted on 01/20/2008 9:19:26 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

“Yes, you do.

Do you get a paycheck or monetary income ( directly or indirectly) in any form because the current IRS system exists?”

Sorry, I was reading in something that is not there. (I’ve seen some pretty arrogent people on the FT bandwagon and was anticipating a possible ambush.)

The answer is “no”. Not one penny that I can think of.


64 posted on 01/20/2008 9:20:08 AM PST by Proud2BeRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: randog

I can’t believe you think the Fair Tax is complicated. Compare and contrast it to the income tax, the above the line deductions, below the line deductions, credits, progressive rates, estimated tax filing deadlines, etc.

The current system is nothing short of INSANE. If we were designing a system from scratch and the stated objectives were to make the system as difficult and onerous and hard to comply with as possible, WE COULDN’T DO A BETTER JOB THAN WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!

To workers, we need to explain this: No more Federal Income Taxes or Social Security or Medicare taxes will be taken out of your paycheck. Instead, you’ll pay taxes at the point you buy goods and services. So that you don’t pay taxes on essentials, every month you will receive a prebate equal to the amount of tax due on basic necessities.

What is so hard about that?


65 posted on 01/20/2008 9:22:28 AM PST by DivaDelMar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: wintertime
"....benefit.... or indirectly..."

I suspect that a case could be made that EVERYBODY in the US can be shown to "benefit" indirectly from the IT. It's still a stupid question. Sorry.

66 posted on 01/20/2008 9:23:40 AM PST by Paladin2 (Huma for co-president!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

Stupid questions get stupid answers. The answer to the question you are really asking is HEdoublehockysticks NO!


67 posted on 01/20/2008 9:25:01 AM PST by Paladin2 (Huma for co-president!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Man50D
"In 2007, that amount would have been based upon $10,210 spending per adult and $3,480 spending per child"

Ummm - don't forget the BIG "pay increase" in the paycheck - every cent now being taken out for all the different taxes would be in the pay check - you get the GROSS - every penny you earn. Look at your paychecks and add THAT up!

Then you have the control over most of the sales taxes you pay by your own choices of what you buy. YOU decide how much of your money will go on taxes - it won't be stolen from you.

For example: my closet is full of top-brand clothing and shoes. I have 3 London Fog coats, a full length wool-Alpaca coat (new retail $600.) jackets by WoolRich, LL Bean etc - which I spent from $2.50 to $4.50 for. One of the London Fogs I went whole hog for, paying $8.99 The $600 dollar wool/Alpaca coat cost me $5.00. Some of these coats still had the original store tags - and I defy anyone to be able to tell any of them weren't brand new off the shelf.

Same with my shoes - nothing but leather and top name brands - average $65 dollar shoes for 95 cents.

And there would be NO National sales tax on any of the above.

So is someone feels they are too good to buy second hand, they can choose to pay the hundreds of extra dollars for new stuff AND the sales tax.

Bottom line: the bulk of taxes a person pays, under the FAIR TAX, is up to US, not the gov't. Buy a used car - no tax...etc.

But for the basic necessity level - the prebate pays for the taxes. The GROSS in the paychecks is gravy and the savings people can pocket by their purchase choices is more gravy.

The desert is: NO APRIL 15th dread. NO control from Washington. (That's the main reason for the pols not wanting to loose the IRS. They loose the KGB control/threat over "The Little People" =

68 posted on 01/20/2008 9:28:33 AM PST by maine-iac7 (",,,but you can't fool all of the people all the time" LINCOLN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: afortiori

You are right to think that way because Canada imposed the GST and kept their income tax.

And Canada has suffered for it.


69 posted on 01/20/2008 9:29:50 AM PST by Nextrush (MCCAIN IS THE ESTABLISHMENT CANDIDATE, STOP HIM AT ALL COSTS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory; Proud2BeRight; Paladin2
Newsflash even with a flat tax system you would still need the same people to manage the flow of money
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Obviously!

The question is would the collection costs be more or less under the Fair Tax ?

What is the cost in the number of pennies per dollar collected under our current system? ( private costs and government costs)

What would be the cost in the number of pennies per dollar under a Fair Tax system? ( private costs and government costs)

By the way,,,I have the same question for you that I have for Proud2BeRight and Paladin2:

Do you, longtermmemmory, Proud2BeRight, and Paladin2 benefit directly or indirectly from the ***business and occupation**** of IRS collection, IRS management, IRS law advice, or IRS tax preparation, or any other form of handling and managing IRS taxes?

Under the current IRS system there are ARMIES of accountants, lawyers, payroll tax firms, tax prep services, and whole departments of some large industries are dedicated to managing IRS taxes. EVERYONE of these people would have their livelihoods threatened by a Fair Tax.

70 posted on 01/20/2008 9:30:58 AM PST by wintertime (Good ideas win! Why? Because people are not stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
Stupid questions get stupid answers. The answer to the question you are really asking is HEdoublehockysticks NO!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It is not a stupid question. If you benefit from the business of IRS management then your opinions are not necessarily impartial.

I am beginning to conclude that you do benefit.

71 posted on 01/20/2008 9:34:09 AM PST by wintertime (Good ideas win! Why? Because people are not stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

I was using $10,000 as a simple, round number to easily show the falsehoods about it being a 30% tax, not as a real-life “this is how much you would actually pay” example. Ya know, trying to make it more basic for those who have math deficiencies.


72 posted on 01/20/2008 9:38:45 AM PST by Knock It Out
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

Comment #73 Removed by Moderator

To: Knock It Out
I was using $10,000 as a simple, round number to easily show the falsehoods about it being a 30% tax, not as a real-life “this is how much you would actually pay” example.

The old false but accurate argument.

74 posted on 01/20/2008 9:42:30 AM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: crz
Before the 16th amendment?

No. I donwanna. You tell me.

75 posted on 01/20/2008 9:43:54 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: crz
Do you also want to explain to me the dif between “freemen” and “Freeman”? You might have to study colonial common law on that one.

I am up to my keester in alligators, steering a horizontal (oil) well in Montana. I am 14 hours into my work day, so if you just want to snipe minor points of semantics, have at. If you have a point to make, quit hiding smugly behind your keyboard and make it.

Others here might not want to wait until I have time to google up some colonial common law, and I am many miles form my library.

76 posted on 01/20/2008 10:40:51 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory; Nextrush
you might as well call the Fair Tax Scam “New and improved Marxism Lite”

This is the anti's favorite argument. It is also their dumbest one. Do you guys know how to "Google" communist manifesto? Try it.

Is it me or does that 2nd plannk say: "A heavy progressive or graduated income tax."?

The real scammers around here are the liars that make up their own FairTax.

77 posted on 01/20/2008 10:51:33 AM PST by groanup (IRS. It's what we live for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: pepperdog
Regardless of the system used 30% is an abomination! Just think THIRTY PERCENT! Almost one third of every dollar in your pocket. And then you still have the city, county and state taxes. Ugh!

The federal income tax is an abomination considering on average people fall into the 15% income tax bracket, pay 7.65% in payroll taxes, 7.65% employer matching plus hidden business taxes and associated compliance costs. It adds up to far more than 30%!

The 30% tax exclusive rate of The Fair Tax, that is the same dollar amount collected as the 23% tax inclusive rate of the income tax, will be reduced due to the prebate not to mention the increase in purchasing power for people as they will receive more in their paychecks after federal income taxes are abolished.
78 posted on 01/20/2008 10:55:38 AM PST by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Proud2BeRight
YAWN -- you still don't get it -- amd don't want to.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

79 posted on 01/20/2008 10:59:40 AM PST by Turret Gunner A20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Study constitutional law then get back to me.

And study as a nuetral person..not as a socialist or other.


80 posted on 01/20/2008 10:59:48 AM PST by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 621-636 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson