Rush Limbaugh is not my Savior, and Neil Boortz isn’t my financial planner.
Open Thread.
Fresh Political Pickins From The Peach State
Rush Limbaugh is not my Savior, and Neil Boortz isn’t my financial planner.
Open Thread.
Copyright © 2011 Tanalach Media, LLC - All rights reserved. Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, and Copyright
{ 272 comments }
Next Comments →
Scoff if you like, but my retirement plan is a jar full of loose change.
Hi Neal!
I would like to see how many people support or do not support the Fair Tax on the PP and why.
BTW we all know my opinion.
Neil Boortz IS the financial planner for nearly every Georgia GOP politician.
He is guilty of malpractice and the voters need to ask them some hard questions.
1. How do the state, counties, and cities plan on paying this tax?
2. Won’t this tax force them to bill the public for services so that they can collect the tax?
3. Won’t the loss of tax-exempt treatment of the bonds they issue cause a 20 to 35% increase in borrowing costs?
4. Won’t a 30% (34% based on Linder’s admissions) federal tax suck all of the viability of sales tax to raise revenue for the states?
5. Won’t a huge federal tax reduce taxable activities for the states?
6. Isn’t the cost of ramping up the State Department of Revenue audit staff overwhelm the paltry FairTax funding?
7. How will voters respond to being personally audited after being promised that there won’t be any audits?
8. Have you personally prepared by buying stock in big oil and other financiers of the FT in anticipation of the $trillion tax forgiveness that would be created?
9. Have you personally prepared by investing in offshore service companies whose business will explode upon passage?
10. For the majority who are lawyers, have you prepared for the HUGE business opportunity to set up structures and contracts to exploit the blanket business exclusion from the FT?
This thread is just an attempt by the Icarus/Farris/Pye axis to paint me and other Fair Taxers as crazy cultists. They fail to realize we do a good job of that all on our own without the aid of their pernicious plot.
Oh, and the Ox will be taking note of this thread as well.
I support the Fair Tax because:
It shifts the burden of paying taxes to a broader base, thus reducing the tax burden on those who pay far more than their share so others can freeload.
It only raises the purchase price of taxed items by 1-2%, but increases my take-home pay by 30%.
It requires all economic classes to pay taxes, but doesn’t overburden the poor.
It takes significant power from government and puts it in the hands of individuals.
Long term, it will reignite the economic engine of this country for generations, and our children and their progeny will reap the benefits and praise our generation for setting the Fair Tax in place.
I am leery of the Fair Tax because:
The same morons in Congress and the White House (Rockefeller Republican’ts and Democrats) that got us into this mess would be the same ones to craft the bill and Constitutional amendment, and I am not sure they can be trusted to not screw it up – or screw us over to keep their power.
There will be a transition period where prices and tax revenue will adjust to market forces before stabilizing. That could be serious for some folks during that transition period.
Everyone who makes a buck from the existence of the Byzantine tax code will need to find a new career.
On balance, I am willing to take the “shakedown cruise” for the Fair Tax so long as it is enacted the way it is currently designed. There must be a Constitutional amendment to repeal the income tax, concurrent with the Fair Tax, or it won’t work. If I have to suffer financially during the transition so my descendants can have the much greater freedom and benefits of no income tax, then let me take the hit.
Would someone please explain to me how a FairTax will work given there are no corresponding limits on how much government can spend?
Why does no one ever say, “Would someone please explain to me how the income tax will work given there are no corresponding limits on how much government can spend?”
Purchase the book and find out for yourself how it works. A prime example of the “gimme” generation”.
Yeah, about that.
Read the ACUTAL BILL and see how it REALLY works.
The book, though is shares a co-author, isn’t what’s in the actual bill.
Guess which one has the power of law when it is passed?
(Hint: It ain’t the book.)
Icarus is attacking the Fair Taxers and the Ox to divert attention from Erick’s great work cleaning up the water in Macon.
I for one, won’t be distracted.
The only thing better than Fair Tax Friday is Two For Tuesday.
What about Freebie Friday?
Threesome Thursdays still rule.
Why is Oxendine making the FairTax such a big part of his campaign? If he cares more about that then issues affecting the state why is he running for Governor and not for Congress or Senate?
Well that’s easy: once we secede under Ox our Congressmen and Senators will be looking for work.
Not this again.
While I don’t support the Fair Tax in it’s entirety, I think the debate that the concept has engendered is a step in the right direction.
I’m more impressed by Forbes’ flat tax concept.
Mike, you need the states to push for the FairTax because Congress will never do it.
Blame the fact that Oxendine has had a number of former Linder staffers come over to his office. I know Oxendine was talking up the FairTax back in 2002, the year Linder and Barr faced off, and has meantioned that Congress needs to pass it for years.
If Congress would never push the issue isnt it then a lost cause from the start? A Governor cannot change the US constitution. I would rather see plans for issues Georgia faces . Why elect a man who will focus more on federal issues then Georgia.
HA!
The Japanese found that dropping interest rates to zero doesn’t work, so they want to drop them to -4%. The trouble is that tangible, actual cash won’t let them, so now they are thinking about eliminating cash.
Many FairTaxers drool over eliminating cash, as it also is the Achille’s heel of their little scheme.
Fools.
Cash economy, goodbye.
HELLO, BARTER ECONOMY.
Politicians, bureaucrats, and Harvard schemers are such morons.
No tax system advisable by man is impervious to defeat by man.
Tom Graves supports the FairTax and is running for Congress!
He’ll push the issue, in the face of opposition, but he’s used to that.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=78833168370
Bingo on Shep @ please explain!
Bucky, please be a little more specific. What part do you want further explanation on?
The federal tax structure DOES affect state issues and governors do have to deal with a lot of crap from the federal government anyway. The water wars with FL, AL and TN are both state and federal issues. Only if we left the union would the Governor not have to deal with federal issues.
The FairTax is one campaign issue, but not the whole campaign platform. I suspect that Oxendine will not be the only candidate, if asked, who supports the FairTax.
Indy,
Do you support a flat tax over the income tax & the Fair Tax?
JM,
The flat tax actually works.
As Kellie has brilliantly pointed out, that way you just take the existing system back to basics and don’t try an impossible transition.
B Balz,
The Fair Tax only addresses the revenue generating portion of the equation, and makes it less punitive and reduces government power. No tax code can regulate spending.
The level of spending, and many of the things government spends money on, is just as immoral, oppressive, and inexcusable as the current income based tax system.
If you want government to spend less, elect Representatives and Senators who are committed to spending less. You always have the option, when none of the candidates on the ballot are suitable, to simply not vote for that office. Vote for the other stuff you support, and just don’t vote for the ones that further more unnecessary government spending. Go to the politicians “town hall” meetings, and hold their feet to the fire on reducing spending. Be an irritant that makes a pearl.
The only one to blame for excessive government spending is us – the voters. That can’t be fixed by a law. But a punitive tax system can. Whether to support the Fair Tax or not has nothing to do with government spending. It’s like the guy who accidentally shoots himself in both feet with a nail gun. He won’t take the nail out of his left foot because it won’t help his right foot, so he just stays there, nailed to the floor, in perpetual pain. At least get one of the nails – that we shot ourselves with – out of our feet! Better yet, yank them both out.
Maybe Graves should give Max Burns a call….and Jim DeMint.
Even Huckabee retreated from it.
Once the surface is scratched, pols realize that the FT cultists do not outnumber the fiscal conservatives who don’t beleive the laws of math have been suspended by Boortz and Linder.
I am against it because of the large number of unknowns in going from one complex mess to a completely different tax basis at a single point or the danger of allowing the government two simultaneous taxing methods with a gradual change. Either the economy would shut down as investors shelter their money because of the high degree of uncertainty of a sudden change, or the government would make both permanent and we will be paying 30% in income taxes and sales taxes.
Further, people who have had income taxed already will get to know the joy of then paying taxes again when they spend them.
Finally, the black market would explode. Why pay 30% more, when you can pay 23% less from someone who isn’t paying taxes. Add on to that 6% or more state sales taxes and it becomes even more attractive.
I like the idea of the government staying out of our personal financial records, but it remains to be see if that would even be the case. The IRS (which would still have to exist) will still have the power to investigate whether the NRST is paid. This means knowing about every purchase we make to audit that we have been paying taxes, as opposed to every income source we have. I would much rather have them know where I get my money, than where I spend it.
I do not support “income tax.”
I do not support “property tax.”
I would consider replacing either or both of those with “nothing”, “user fees” or “sales tax”… in order of preference.
I believe a “flat tax” will not stay flat… example; evolution of the current “income tax.” Plus, I still contend that a/any tax on income is illegitimate… It is Stealing!
I also contend that a/any tax on property that has to be paid at any time beyond the time of purchase is forced coercion. “Pay us or you lose your property.” Organized crime uses this same tactic… they call it “paying for protection”, our government says “it’s for the children.” No matter how you frame it, it is Coercion, with a capital “C”.
I believe a “flat tax” combined with a “VAT” is just that, an “added tax.” The result will be our current income tax with an added tax burden.
JK,
I would like to see a fair tax implemented. But first we need to get rid of “The Un-Fair Taxes.” I, like you, have problems with “The Fair Tax” as written… but unlike you, I do believe it is a step in the right direction… that is, if the 16th is repealed as the first step. Where we go from there, should be up for discussion. However, unlike the “Laffer curve,” maximizing revenue potential to the government will not be my agenda or motivation, maximizing revenue potential and prosperity for the individual, will.
When history is written it will record that the FairTax cultists were fools who ushered in a VAT IN ADDITION TO THE INCOME TAX via their activism.
Book it.
Indy,
It is what I fear also.
Anyway, I wanted to run an idea past you. Could you send me an email to this temporary email address (to avoid spam) so that I can send you something.
[email protected]
OK.
How many of you FTers have paid the State of Georgia the use taxes that you owe under the laws of this state?
If the FT is so “fair” and ‘everybody pays’ how come you don’t pay it?
I paid it.
You didn’t.
Is this “fair?”
You are tax evaders of the very tax you wish to impose.
Not fair IndyI… They wish to trade the IT or the FT… you’re asking them to pay both.
…”IT for the FT”…
you’re asking them to pay both.
Which, by the way, is what the flat tax plus vat tax does.
The Fair Tax generate revenue is severally effected by reductions in spending during recessions like this one. So at a time when we need the government the most, we have less government revenue.
This is not a big enough problem for me not to support the Fair tax, but it is a concern.
Jane,
What do we need government to do during a recession that calls for spending money?
Comment peek-a-boo.
Polo.
Or is it Marco?
Marco. Polo is for effete snobs.
Shep, I agree with your statement about the income tax. In fact I would ask the question “What’s right, fair, or constitutional about the income tax?
Oh, no, I am certainly NOT for the VAT.
The FairTaxers bringing a sales tax to the fore is giving the Obamanation cover to rush through a VAT without doing away with the IT.
Having worked with it in the UK, VAT has its own set of exemptions, exclusions, and accounting alternatives that pervert the system.
There is plenty of fraud under sales tax. As noted here – WITHOUT CONTRADICTION – nearly all PPers are guilty of sales and use tax evasion.
If I ran for office, the first thing I would do would be to challenge the opponent to disclose his sales/use tax filings.
IndyI,
Just curious, we know what you are against… What are you for? Seriously, what tax structure, if any, would you support?
Tax systems are irrelevant. Any will do and any can be broader and fairer than the current morass.
The PROBLEM is that the USA is going to collapse from overspending and debt. This is now inevitable.
The currently monthly rollover of the Chinese-held US debt is $250 billion a month. The NEW borrowings are another $250 billion a month. On an annualized basis, the next Treasury auction represents more than $8 trillion of new debt JUST THIS YEAR.
There is not enough demand or purchasing ability in the world to buy this debt, so the USA is about to hit a wall at 1000 MPH.
Second, tax revenues are down 35% and are worsening.
There is only ONE SOURCE of funding left and that is to TAKE the savings of American’s and a huge component of their earnings.
This is why we will see a VAT in addition to the IT.
The fools in DC have exhausted external funding and are now practicing what Lenin advocated to destroy the middle class – exploding inflation and taxation – to pay the bill.
The FT is one of just so many tricks and tools of the oligarchy controlling the 2 parties.
Agreed. Spending is the problem. But this thread, I thought was to discuss the revenue collecting side of the argument.
Icarus,
Tomorrow, let’s have a “Government Spending Saturday” to discuss, should, could, what and how to cut government spending. I know what I know. But I would like to hear what other’s think…. invite the Blog for Democracy folks and see if they can jutify their causes.
Just caught this comment. Better to do it on a weekday if you want real participation. Not sure how we’ll work in the alliteration theme, but I’ll have a few beers and come up with something.
How about
Treasury Tapping Tuesdays
Mortgage Our Future Mondays
Wild and Wacky Wasteful Wednesdays
Indy, does the Sales and Use Tax law apply to individuals? Note the designation, “business professional purchaser”, at the following link:
https://etax.dor.ga.gov/compliance/usetax/ut_overview.aspx
The income tax does not fair much better in a recession. Unemployed people do not pay income or social security taxes. They still have to buy stuff though. Also, there are large numbers of those in the economy who never pay income taxes because their income is in cash and never reported. They all still have to buy stuff.
The most fun thing about this Friday FT thread is the hyperbole, mythology, and exaggeration of the Income Tax cultists.
Doug Deal: “Either the economy would shut down as investors shelter their money because of the high degree of uncertainty of a sudden change..”
In my opinion, the economy basically has shutdown. People are not investing in the stock market. Companies are not hiring. Lenders are not lending. To be precise, none of these activities are happening as much as they normally would.
B Balz: “Would someone please explain to me how a FairTax will work given there are no corresponding limits on how much government can spend?” Spending is a problem but it is a separate problem. Just as I think the Fair tax needs to constitutional amendment to prohibit additional taxes, perhaps we need an amendment to balance the budget?
Indy “Many FairTaxers drool over eliminating cash” Please cite any example anywhere that any one who supports the fairtax said or printed anything like this.
Indy’s and JK’s reaction to Fair tax Friday is that if anyone supports it, the sky is falling.
I think if you take what we have now and multiply it by a significant amount, this is what you will get during the approach of the switchover as well as for a significant amount of time after.
MSBS, if that was directed at me, it missed.
I actually like a sales tax as a replacement for the income tax if it is truly broad based, at low rates, and is met with draconian spending cuts.
I must like it. I am the only PPer paying it.
No, IndyInjun, I was directing it at any one person, just generally for some of the silliness that the Income Tax cultists post.
“I actually like a sales tax as a replacement for the income tax if it is truly broad based, at low rates, and is met with draconian spending cuts.”
That is what the FT is, at least on the revenue generating side. I haven’t met the FT supporter who doesn’t want to cut spending significantly, or thinks it is less important.
What I find interesting about Fair tax supporters is how they ignore all the issues and or just say it has to be better,
No change will ever satisfy a 100% but to jump into a plan knowing it would hurt the economy is just irresponsible.
I firmly believe many Fair tax supporters like the idea because they think it would end the IRS. And as I explained numerous times this would be impossible with the conflict on interest issue regarding tax liens between the State and Federal government. I wonder how much support would go away if more people knew the IRS issue is a fantasy as well as the monkey math behind the plan.
JK,
Wouldn’t the IRS no longer exist as far as the individual worker is concerned?
Nope.
The FT Bill funds the State Revenue Departments and gives them audit rights over individuals.
Unless they have the right to audit individuals, there is no way to enforce the sales tax, since it will be private individuals participating in the black market, not legitimate business enterprises.
Make sure you keep receipts on everything you own, no matter how inexpensive, for 7 years.
IndyI,
If that is true… that is a major flaw. Under a sales tax system, only businesses should be auditable, not consumers…
DD,
Even though I don’t fear the “black market”, it is about as close as one can get to a free-market… I do understand that under a sales tax system, it could be an issue. HUGE fines and Prison time should remove the “profit” motive of venturing into the black market. Make compliance the path of least resistance, so to speak. As a businessman, I’m simply collecting the tax… losing my business and or going to jail for trying to come up with a way to keep some of the state’s money and to fool the auditor… not worth it.
How can you not fear the black marget under the NRST, when the sales tax is how you precisely pay for government, including defense, police and national security? So, your goal is no revenue for the government?
DD
You mis-read. I just said I didn’t fear it on it’s own merits…. I said under NRST it could be a problem if the incentive is not removed.
I don’t fear it at all except under a NRST regieme, since we will basically create throngs of tax cheats and further degrade the respect for the rule of law.
Want an alternative?
The greatest thing about the Fair Tax is that everybody pays taxes, and thus, start paying attention to the spending in Washington. (line from my speech tomorrow)
Any tax system MUST include a portion for everyone to pay. The progressive tax system does not do this, in fact is designed, so many do not.
The flat tax puts a burden on the poor and elderly by taxing the basic necessities of life, the only good thing about the progressive tax system is it does eliminate that portion of income from taxation from most everyone.
With those assumptions, here is an alternative, of which I have NOT submitted for independent review, but will do so. My initial calculations verify it could work.
There are many holes in it’s implementation, all of which I am still addressing.
Flat tax rate of 12% of the first $7000 of yearly earnings.
0% tax rate of earnings from $7001 – $14,999
Flat tax rate of 12% of all earning $15,000+
This system requires every person pay an amount of taxes. It gives incentive to earn more than the poverty level, once you pass $7000, it is an automatic 12% raise. (the inverse could be said when you pass $15,000, but it is just the dollars past $15,000 that have the tax)
No deductions, no exemptions. (except for SSI)
Currently, I still support the Fair Tax. Once I vet my idea, and if my calculations are correct, I will be a big supporter of my idea instead
BTW, Dave Ramsey supports The Fair Tax.
YOU SAID
The greatest thing about the Fair Tax is that everybody pays taxes, and thus, start paying attention to the spending in Washington. (line from my speech tomorrow)
WRONG
What about rebate checks to lower income people?
YOU SAID
The flat tax puts a burden on the poor and elderly by taxing the basic necessities of life, the only good thing about the progressive tax system is it does eliminate that portion of income from taxation from most everyone.
WRONG
Because States, counties just find other ways to tax the person ie sales tax……
YOU SAID
Flat tax rate of 12% of the first $7000 of yearly earnings.
0% tax rate of earnings from $7001 – $14,999
Flat tax rate of 12% of all earning $15,000+
This system requires every person pay an amount of taxes. It gives incentive to earn more than the poverty level, once you pass $7000, it is an automatic 12% raise. (the inverse could be said when you pass $15,000, but it is just the dollars past $15,000 that have the tax)
WRONG
Once again you are using monkey math! You avoid the 30% tax on benefits….. Heath insurance alone would be around 3 to 5k per family. And if you had a real major medical problem most people would have to file BK if covered on the 30% tax alone.
YOU SAID
Currently, I still support the Fair Tax. Once I vet my idea, and if my calculations are correct, I will be a big supporter of my idea instead
MAJOR SUGGESTION
If you ever get bigger than a one man show you should pay Kellie anything she wants so you do not go BK!
JK,
I think you have confused two statements. To continue your format of reply:
YOU SAID
Once again you are using monkey math! You avoid the 30% tax on benefits….. Heath insurance alone would be around 3 to 5k per family. And if you had a real major medical problem most people would have to file BK if covered on the 30% tax alone.
WRONG
I was talking about my flat tax idea, not the FT idea. I never indicated, infered, or said anything about a 30% tax.
YOU SAID
What about rebate checks to lower income people?
If those pre-bates were equal to, or greater than, the tax on the amount of money they make each you, you are correct, however, last time I checked, the pre-bates would be the equivalent to the tax on the amount spent lower than the median income. Regardless, even the poor in our country have cell phones, big screen tv’s, microwave ovens, and are over weight, they will pay attention to the tax rate next time they go to purchase their new iPhone.
You also bring state and local taxes into the conversation, that is a worthy debate to be sure, but I am speaking 100% of the federal tax system.
I do not know if your last comment was a compliment to Kellie, or an insult to me, so I will assume the best, I am sure Kellie has much better things to do than consult me!
Sorry for not proofing my prior post before clicking submit. I humbly ask to disregard the paragraph about the pre-bates and instead use the one below:
If those pre-bates were equal to, or greater than, the tax on the amount of money they make each month, you are correct, however, last time I checked, the pre-bates would be the equivalent to the tax on the amount spent lower than what is now the median income. (I am not saying everything below the median is “pre-bated” just using that point as a point of reference.) Regardless, even the poor in our country have cell phones, big screen tv’s, microwave ovens, and are over weight, they will pay attention to the tax rate next time they go to purchase their new iPhone or twinkies.
Shep and MsBass:
First, oh Heck no to the IRS watching our spending habits.
Second, any stats on an increase in crime using a national income tax? Intuitively, I deduce crime goes up. LOL
The point that I am making with my question is that with a fixed tax rate of 23% (Where did this majick number come from?) the government will continue to easily overspend. Shep keenly points to the obvious: That is what WE do now.
While respect that this thread focuses on the tax (revenue) side of the equation, I maintain collecting revenue in a purportedly streamlined, easier to understand system is a “NICE to have.”
Controlling spending is a ” MUST HAVE”, anything less is slow, humiliating, economic suicide. Humiliating because our Nation will have to bow to others as we are no longer strong enough to lead. For some, this may seem like singing kumbaya in a state of nirvana, but I digress.
The key is to avoid nailing one’s economic feet to the floor by prudent spending. BTW, MsBass our system allows that the “the irritant that becomes a pearl’ may also become marginalized and silenced. Believe it.
As our politicians have shown us over the last FIVE years (GOP bailouts , followed by Obama bailouts) the spending side is completely out of control on a bi-partisan basis. Has anyone seen what the rate of growth is for M2/M3 lately? Icarus? Inflation usually lags a precipitous increase in money supply by 18 months.
Any discussion about changing revenues, without a pragmatic change to spending is absurd. I cannot run my business that way, we cannot run the US that way.
I believe any sitting Representative Dem or GOP, [Reps. Isakson and Chambliss, please take note] that do not deliver spending cuts ought to be replaced. EVERY new candidate ought to use SPENDING cuts as their FIRST plank of the platfom. The US must provide a dis-incentive to ‘bring home the bacon’ on projects that do not represent value, such as virtually anything Sen. Byrd supports, ‘bridge to nowhere’, ETC.
Entitlements MUST be limited in their growth and actually cut. We have been going Socialist for a long time now. US Gov’t % of GDP rose 5% from roughly 25% to roughly 30%, since ’76. That is alot of nails in the nail gun.
It is a time, in President Obama’ words, to put away childish ideas. Are we strong enough to do this? I’d d’ruther doubt it.
And for the record, Mr. Oxendine won’t get my vote on principle. I just don’t like the cut of his jib.
“Has anyone seen what the rate of growth is for M2/M3 lately? Icarus? Inflation usually lags a precipitous increase in money supply by 18 months.”
I’m very concerned about inflation, but not because of what we’ve done with the bailouts or even the stimulus package.
One of the more heated debates I remember from grad school was on the real measure of the money supply. The thinking then was that most people considered their credit card available balances as “money”, and there had to be some consideration for that. The 00′s brought us the concept that home equity was an ATM, and thus the money supply increased dramatically during the last decade.
With all the money the government has “created” in the past year, it still doesn’t equal the amount of money that was destroyed via bank losses (and the multiplier of fractional reserve banking) and the related contraction of available credit.
The inflation that will eventually occur will be from $Trillion + budget deficits as far as the eye can see, and entitlements that can’t support a retiring baby boomer population.
Thus, spending and entitlements are the problem, and are a much bigger threat to our way of life than the source of tax revenue.
Some fair tax detractors assume that they are smarter than fair tax supporters. They also assume what we think and what we know and often they are wrong. The Fair tax is not about eliminating the IRS. Not one post on here today mentioned eliminating the IRS until someone had the audacity to tell me what I think.
As far as II’s “WITHOUT CONTRADICTION” contradiction comment goes, has anyone on here not broken a traffic law? If you don’t speak up, we are all guilty in the eyes of the Lord! OH, THE HORROR! THE SKY IS FALLING!
GOPGeorgia
You are full of BS! Anyone who has ever gone to a FAIR TAX RALLY or heard Boortz, Linder knows this is a major talking point! This shows you are like a cult member who cannot even be honest with yourself!
As I said you guys ignore all the issues and chant on like cult members.
John
To add support to your statement. Their own bumper stickers and online ads have the letters “IRS” with a red circle around it with a slash through it.
Far from me to put words in people’s mouth, but I know we will always have an IRS, whether we call it the IRS, KGB, POP, or ASS, some department of the government will exist to collect whatever tax system we use, whether it be what we have, Fair Tax, Flat Tax, import tariffs, or gun to head and take what they want system.
I believe the purpose of the “Fire the IRS” call and the aforementioned bumper sticker is more of a rallying cry to eliminate the SYSTEM we have now. Like I said, I am not trying to put words in people’s mouths or interpret bumper stickers, but that is how I think it is meant.
If you acknowledge their existance, though, it means John is wrong in mentioning that many believe they will eliminate the IRS, since that is what they their own materials literally say.
I forgot to add another reason that I am against the NRST.
Addicting every American to a monthly check from the government. It is not a question of whether this will be perverted by a future Congress into a wealth distribution scheme, but how quickly.
GOP, so you are admitting that you haven’t paid a tax that you are saying “everybody pays?”
That got me looking into the FT after being a blind supporter.
As someone able to make a fortune from the FT my research made me happy.
As someone who understands, that despite the ‘prebate’ ,countless Grandma’s are made destitute while corps get $1 trillion in tax forgiveness, the sheer hypocrisy and UNFAIRNESS overwhelmed me.
Indy,
I was a support once too. There is a lot of good to it, but the negatives are overwelming.
That should be supporter.
OK.
I am an opponent of Oxendine or Graves.
I can prove that their tax scheme puts a 30% tax on Grandma’s nursing home care and gives Exxon $10 billion in existing tax liability forgiveness.
Ask Max Burns what campaigning on this idiocy does.
I have a question for the FT supporters. Income tax cultists need not apply.
Why is a prebate check better than doing what Georgia and so many other states already do (and have proven works) by exempting sales tax on the necessities that comprise most of the expenses for the poor? While Congress can play politics with exemptions, they can do that even if the FT is passed with no exemptions and a prebate check.
I agree, there is no need for the “prebate”,… just exempt necessities and charity organizations (non-profits…no “Tax Jesus”),… and use the curent welfare system to catch the rest, if needed.
After reading through the comments, I have to give props to MsBassSinger.
She listed the reasons she’s for the FairTax (several of which I disagree with) but, more importantly, she listed some reasons she’s leery of the FairTax (again, some of which I don’t have a problem with).
Point being, she’s at least made an attempt at a critical look at the FairTax, which is what separates the FairTax supporters from the FairTax cultists.
As a former die-hard supporter, I became concerned when valid questions were routinely dismissed or obfuscated. I think the FairTax cultists should understand that they could win supporters a lot easier if they would make an honest attempt at addressing shortcomings of the bill instead of pretending it has none.
Icarus,
MSBassSinger is a he.
MS = “Master’s Servant”
BassSinger = what I do for Him when I get the opportunity.
Thanks for the props, but I ain’t no chick.
I have a singing bass.
LOL…..Rolling eyes….
You have a chick’s name.
How is MSBassSinger a chick’s name? After many years of using that moniker, no one but you has ever read it that way. Perhaps your interpretation says more about your thought processes than about the use of the name.
I have a process? I don’t think so. Pretty much random when it comes to my thoughts.
I thought it was a chick’s name too MS Bass Singer.
I knew it was a gay fish reference all along.
Wait a minute.
Kanye West is a girl?
Don’t even joke.
Spacey-G is a boy fish?
I know… I’m trying too hard.
It’s Farris’ fault.
I honestly thought the discussion of a prebate check was rhetoric until I googled same.
The information shows a progressively larger check issued based on the number of children one supports. Ya’ know the whole idea FT smells badly to me.
Does this replace AFDC?
Sometime ago on PP a comment was offered that the FT is similar to the abortion issue as they are both used a vote getting mechansism.
I’ve never voted for any chick that’s asked me to go half-sies on the abortion.
Worry more about the one that asks you to go thirds.
FairTaxers – There are no audits of individuals under the FT
Language of HR 25, the FairTax Bill
The consumer is RESPONSIBLE.
He/she must KEEP RECEIPTS.
That’s a little bit of a stretch IndyI… but I do agree, the language could be better and should be changed, holding the “person selling the taxable property or service” responsible. That way if they didn’t collect it… they would still have to pay it… incentive to collect and keep good records.
It is not the consumers responsibility to keep receipts, it is the responsibility of the seller or a purchaser who asserts an “intermediate and export sales exemption”:
Just a thought Woodrow,
With the recent changes here to Wordpress, your comment will get lost from those who search using the “recent comments” feature.
I’d suggest posting at the bottom of the thread as a new comment, since this is a common theme throughout this thread anyway.
Good point, will do.
FairTaxers (Boortz says this one repeatedly) – The price of the item on the shelf is what you pay at checkout
H.R. 25
And when one gets such a receipt the tax will be 30% of the price exclusive of tax.
Liars, liars, pants on fire…
This says nothing about what the price of the item on the shelf is. It only says what must appear on the receipt.
Though you would be right to say that nothing in the bill requires the retailer to include the tax on the shelf price.
And when one gets such a receipt the tax will be 30% of the price exclusive of tax.
*warning*- using the extreme to make a point.
Make it 100%… as long as once purchased, it’s mine, no threat of confiscation and never to be taxed again!
closed italic after ‘tax”
Fairtaxers claim – No more IRS!
H.R. 25
Yes there is no more “Internal Revenue Service” just a collection of replacements doing the same thing.
This is akin to an American Colonist complaining “Sure there’s no more Monarchy, but there’s still some form of Government that does the same thing”
Of course there’ll be some form of tax collecting agency, but it will more efficient and respect our rights more.
JK,
You can claim I am full of BS all you like, but that doesn’t change the fact that you are incapable of defending your own plan. You don’t deny you think you are smarter than anyone who disagrees with you.
You are arrogant. You are myopic. You are a child drooling and sitting in a corner wearing a tinfoil hat, thinking that you can prove you are sane by calling others cultists and crazy.
You got some advice to cease to be so condescending and to be more understanding after your bid for public office. I think these are lessons you have yet to learn, but from what I have seen, you think you know it all.
http://www.peachpundit.com/2006/07/27/attention-john-konop/
You have a website but I agree it should be http://www.Idisagreewitheverythingyouareabouttosay.com
Yes, I have seen bumper stickers with IRS with slash through it. I have also read the book and know that it advocates the change of, not elimination of, the IRS.
“GOP, so you are admitting that you haven’t paid a tax that you are saying “everybody pays?”” Nope. If everybody pays it, then I paid it too. I am saying you are an alarmist screaming the sky is falling. Are we clear on that?
GOPGeorgia
You sound like a cult member!
…First, the 23 percent figure is disingenuous. If the current price of a widget is $1, a 30-cent sales tax would be added at the register under the FairTax. Because 30 cents is 23 percent of $1.30, backers of the tax claim that the tax rate is 23 percent. In addition, to make the claim that the tax would bring the same amount of money into the Treasury, FairTax proponents assume that the government is paying tax to itself on its purchases.
The Presidents’ Advisory Panel on Tax Reform — that’s President Bush’s tax panel — calculated that the rate would have to be at least 34 percent, not 30 percent, “and likely higher over time if the base erodes, creating incentives for significant tax evasion.” Brookings Institution economist William Gale puts the rate at 44 percent — and his calculation doesn’t take into account cheating, for which there would be ample incentive.
Furthermore, the 30 percent rate assumes that the tax would be imposed on a broad range of goods and services that has no precedent — putting a hefty and politically implausible extra tax bite on purchases of new homes, rent, food, health insurance, medical care and mortgage interest. ….
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123001909.html
John Konop,
At least make your arguments with facts, not myths.
The math is that a $1 item (trail price before current sales tax) has ~18 cents of embedded tax already built into the $1 retail price from all levels of its manufacture and distribution. The FT eliminates that, so when you take the ~82 cent price (with the taxes removed), and add the FT, you have a retail sales price, with FT, of ~$1.01. Now you can vary the numbers slightly, but that is the fact of how the FT is calculated.
You can agree or disagree with it, but at least tell the truth, or take reasonable steps to find out what the FT is.
Of course, the exact amount of embedded tax will vary between specific items and services. And there will be a period of adjustment when some companies will try to pocket the difference until competition squeezes that out. If the FT proponents haven’t done the research to quantify that, they need to.
FairTaxers – No onerous audits
H.R. 25
FairTaxers – No more records to keep
H.R. 25
Noted that the Sec. 509 receipt would be a Wal-mart receipt and every other receipt for goods and services.
If you have no receipts and if you are audited , you will PAY!
Next Comments →
Comments on this entry are closed.