Skip to comments.Fair tax proposal could unite country
Posted on 04/26/2007 3:30:39 PM PDT by Wuli
Our income tax system gives foreign manufacturers tax advantages over the "Made in America" label, makes debt more favorable than wealth, and against all reason costs taxpayers $265 billion a year in hours and money just to obey the law.
That average citizens are tirelessly inspired to organize and rally for an alternative that is simple, transparent and fair apparently makes Atlanta Journal-Constitution writer Jay Bookman so uncomfortable he resorts to comparisons with cults and misstates the actual tax-inclusive FairTax rate of 23 percent ("Fervent faith in Fair Tax defies reason," @issue, April 23).
In his cranky, contrarian quest to prove to the masses just how wrong they are, he asks how the Fair Tax can be revenue neutral if everyone pays less. First, some will pay more depending on how much they spend this is a tax on consumption, after all. Secondly, he misses the larger point. Consumption is a far broader base for taxation than earnings and, therefore, generally requires less of each.
Dr. Laurence Kotlikoff, Boston University economist, finds that married couples earning from $30,000 to $50,000 with two children would have a lifetime average tax rate of from 3.4 to 11.1 percent compared to the current tax system's rate of 15.3 to 19.6 percent. This is such a fundamental concept; it is difficult to understand how Bookman missed this bedrock truth about the FairTax.
Under the FairTax, 10 million to...........
(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...
Anyone who believes that money is the main motivator in my life, guess again!
Live it. Learn it.
Agreed. The old saying is that "money can not buy you happiness"....to which I add "but it can put you in a better bargaining position".
Folks, we CAN beat the entrenched mess in Malfunction Junction.
But it will take MASSIVE CITIZEN PRESSURE to fill this swamp.
The FairTax aint perfect no tax IS but it COULD serve as a vital waypoint back to a tax system the Founders MIGHT recognize were they to visit today.
Join the fight!
Every concerned citizen should go to as many Congressional Town Hall Meetings as possible if only because they are great theater. If you can go and PUBLICLY ask your congresscritter something like the following, so much the better:
"Except for several lapses in our national character and a brief period surrounding the War Between the States, for America's first 126 years statistically, perhaps the most prosperous and free period in our history -- we funded the legitimate and Constitutional functions of government with INDIRECT taxes on consumption. For our first 126 years we held to the tax system the Founders intended here.
Explain to these good folks why you (do/do not -- as the case warrants) support the Fair Tax (HR 25/S25) which seeks to REPLACE the UNFAIR and INCOMPREHENSIBLE income tax with a FLAT, FAIR national retail sales tax which would eliminate the IRS, one of the most dangerous agencies in government and, not incidentally, require that 12 million illegals pay for some of the welfare and other services theyre currently sucking from the rest of us?"
Remain at the mike and DON'T LET HIM GET AWAY WITH THE OLD POLITICAL TRICK OF ANSWERING SOME OTHER QUESTION.
A few thousand of us doing this on a regular basis will send 'em the message.
One man, one vote, one tax bill.
Once you pay your tax you are free to keep what you earn.
With one tax bill, the politicians can not divide and conquer the people, with schemes to tax the other guy.
Been broke, many times, damn near am now, ain’t a big deal!
If I get hungry I can always go trap a mess of crawdads or shoot a fat squirrel.
Thing is, if I’m not free, I can’t do anything but beg, and starve!
Hell, folks, Rudy couldn’t likely open a can of corned beef hash, without a Redneck to show him how.
If I’m going to call someone a “leader” they should know everything I do, and more!
Hell, if Rudy’s foot caught fire, and 911 didn’t respond, he would burn slap up, when all he had to do was pick which leg to piss down!
Politicians use tax money to get themselves elected and re-elected. They’re not about to change anything.
Durn near anything would be better than the current cluster——. I could live with the fair tax quite easily although I prefer the simplicity of a flat tax.
Thanks for the correction.
“Anyone who believes that money is the main motivator in my life, guess again!”
Who pays your bills?
Thanks for the ping. It’s amazing how many times I read someone attempting to rip apart The Fair Tax with misinformation and no alternatives.
His view of the world has to go through the MSM, to whom he is heavily dependent at this stage of the game.
I think the liberal media has already selected him as th GOP candidate, mainly because they have a whole arsenal of crap they can rain down on him when the time comes.
Only if it has boiled down to between Rudy and Hillary would I vote for him.
“Who pays your bills?”
AMEN Dick Bachert! AMEN!
One thing is for sure! The founders would certianly shake their head in bewilderment at the current mess we call a tax system in this country!
We will never again be a truly free people so long as we have the income tax and the IRS!
The flat tax is an improvement over the graduated income tax, but it would not produce the windfall in tax revenue that the Fair Tax would (Without any additional burden to the American Taxpayer I might add.) Most people who discuss taxes generally get it wrong because they confuse taxes with tax collection. Under any system, no matter how you structure it, the end consumer pays the tax. It is built into the cost off the goods or service. If there were no taxes, the end price would be lower. When you buy a car, the taxes burden of everyone involved in its finance and production are built into the final price, all of the taxable elements along the way from the shareholders dividend, to the component suppliers to the people who build and sell it. The taxes they pay, all come from the final price paid for the car. Changing the system doesn't change that.
The tax rate in the United States is roughly 20% of GDP. So when you spend money on something, you are paying 20% in taxes. Set up any tax system you want and it will end up working the same. The only way you lower or raise taxes is when the government changes the percentage of GDP they take in. To demonstrate with a simple model, consider if you were to hire a piano teacher for your child. The piano teacher charges a competitive amount for their services plus what is necessary to cover the tax bill. You can have a system where you pay the total amount to the teacher and the teacher sends the tax portion to the government or you can pay the teacher their part and send the government theirs directly. It's the same either way. the consumer is paying the tax. There are only two types of taxes; consumption taxes and wealth taxes. The estate tax and property taxes are examples of wealth taxes. Almost all other taxes are consumption taxes, irregardless of how they are collected. Go ahead and try to define a system where it isn't the end consumer that pays the tax. You'll fail. Under close examination, the real tax payment will always trace back to the consumer.
There is, however, a compelling reason for the fair tax. In the US, roughly 20% of the price of everything is built in tax burden. However when an imported product is sold, that 20% or a large portion of it goes out of the country. The current tax system allows foreign imports to compete against US products which have a 20% tax burden built into them. The fair tax would lower the sticker price of the US product and tax revenue to the government would be the same whether a domestic or import product was sold. It would go a long way in correcting our trade imbalance. Right now foreign companies get nearly 20% bonus revenue vs their domestic competitors. If union members understood how taxes really work, they would take to the streets demanding the fair tax.
The current trade deficit is over $700 billion a year. The Fair tax would trap 20% of that in the country as tax revenue. It would be well over $100 billion a year in additional tax revenue to the government without the American Taxpayer paying one cent more than they do now.
The Fair tax proponents say a rate of 20 - 23% would be necessary to produce the same revenue as the current tax system. They forget the lost revenue leaving the country. By trapping that revenue in the country, a tax rate of more like 17% - 18% would produce the same revenue as the current system.
“You nailed him.”
Democrats are hostile to tax payers.
Thanks for the ping Man50D. Interesting seeing new posters discuss the nrst... well, not new posters... posters new to the nrst...
I read them all but I learn from the experts on here. ;-)
New tag line!
Good on you normal4me.
“Hell, if Rudys foot caught fire, and 911 didnt respond, he would burn slap up, when all he had to do was pick which leg to piss down!”
Aren’t you assuming Julie-Annie is still normal? He did attend some public functions in full drag. Wurprise, surprise, surprise! He was no better looking as a female.
But he was just as much a Liberal & gun grabber in drag.
Its easy to understand how bookman misses the issue pertaining to the FAIR TAX, he does’nt! Liberals are scared to death that this will catch on and will remove the bedrock of liberalism.Taking away from those that earn it and giving it to dirtbags that dont(their voters).Socialism and marxism would be damn near impossible to implement with the Fair tax.
Just shedding the progressive tax would help so
when the tax payers votes for the big spenders they also
are aware they are actually going to have to pay from
their own earnings.
Very astute, and I think valid, observation. Add that to the 200 billion or so currently being wasted annually in compliance costs associated with the current system and we begin to see some REAL savings!
And, I might add, our manufacturing base would return virtually overnight as the U.S. would now be the only developed country on earth where business decisions could be made without considering the tax consequences.
This is the reason they will NEVER pass a "fair" tax. They want control and will not give it up willingly.
LMBO! Thanks. Country boy will survive, BTTT! Blackbird.
Exactly, this is what troubles me about all these new tax schemes, it is merely at the end of the day another attempt to "control" the cookie jar.
With one tax bill for all, the control is more on the side of an undivided people.
As far as I know, the only presidential candidate openly supporting the FairTax is a Democrat.
The FairTax would give you a monthly check from the government.
Why the bias Lucy?
THe check is a rebate (in advance) of the taxes that will be paid on necessity level spending - not a gift.
Really? What about that monthly prebate check every duly registered household in the US would receive? A little tinkering here, and a little tinkering there, and... But no, politicians wouldn't do that, would they?
Cause nobody would be able to figure out our secret weapon. How long do you think that advantage would last?
And you don't see anything wrong with the government deciding what my necessity level spending is, or giving me a monthly check to cover the tax on that spending?
The government giveth and the government taketh away; blessed be the government.
The FairTax puts us all on the dole.
The Constitution gives the Federal government the right to collect tax on income from work, not the 16th amendment.
I don't think it's great that they decide necessity level spending. I don't think anyone likes that. However, that is not a reason to dislike the nrst - the government currently decides how much they'll exempt from taxation by adjusting marginal rates, exemptions, deductions, and credits. The only difference is the mechanism by which the necessity level spending is exempted from tax. If you oppose the untaxing of some income or some spending, you'll oppose the rebate and you'll oppose today's different marginal rates, exemptions, deductions and credits.
No, I do not oppose being rebated taxes.
I thought the 16th allowed tax on income to be unapportioned.
About the only way they could redistribute under the Fair Tax system would be to increase the “poverty” level to increase the amount of the prebate.
It really irks them, however, that Bill Gates, you, me, and the homeless guy down the street gets the same “prebate”.
They could manipulate the prebate check, but the rules are that every household gets the same amount,
and they’d be pulling their hair out knowing that households that don’t vote for them would be getting the same as those that do.
Chapter and verse, please.
And we know the rules never change.
Sorry Lucy. THe income tax existed before the 16th. Do your own research.