Author Topic: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax  (Read 14301 times)

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #50 on: December 27, 2007, 03:58:37 PM »
Jesus, it's not rocket science.  ::)

Such taxation would ruin our great free market economy and discourage competition. It's like that cock and bull idea that Dick Army or whoever came up with a while back.
I like Ron Paul but the idea of a national sales tax has been analyzed to death by some fairly smart people:
http://www.exponentialimprovement.com/cms/fairtax.shtml
http://www.tax.org/thp/readings.nsf/cf7c9c870b600b9585256df80075b9dd/cfbe9de4a695d74f85257014004f1184?OpenDocument

And it really is a scam.  It is anything but fair and it enables a whole new arm of criminality in dealing with black market untaxed items.


Here's a quote from one of the above articles:  "But their "tax-inclusive" sales tax rate of ~23% tax is really a 30% "tax-exclusive" sales tax to which we generally refer. And to be revenue neutral, the rate would have to be a "tax-exclusive" sales tax of 56%."

I don't like taxes any more than the next guy--except for Ozark--but I'm not going to get hysterical about scrapping the IRS or the Code b/c I feel helpless in the matter.

Here's more cutting and pasting from me.  I would like to hear Ozark's opinion on this narrow topic:

Everyone understands the sales tax. Most Americans pay one every day, and those who don't probably revel in the fiscal probity of their state lawmakers. Supporters of the national sales tax have capitalized on that familiarity, offering taxpayers an apparently simple alternative to the confusing federal income tax. But in the process, they have engaged in some dubious sleight of hand, quoting rates in tax-inclusive, rather than tax-exclusive terms. (Tax- exclusive rates reflect the ratio of the tax to the pretax price of an item, while tax-inclusive rates are the ratio of the tax to the after-tax price of the good, including the tax itself.)

Fair Tax advocates defend this fiscal legerdemain, insisting that it facilitates comparison with the income tax (the rates for which are typically quoted in tax-inclusive terms). Perhaps. But it also obscures comparison with state sales taxes, the only reasonable point of comparison for most taxpayers.  http://www.tax.org/thp/readings.nsf/cf7c9c870b600b9585256df80075b9dd/cfbe9de4a695d74f85257014004f1184?OpenDocument



JBGRAY

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2038
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #51 on: December 27, 2007, 04:43:26 PM »
Great stuff here.  How would inflation come into play in this?  Having this flat tax and possibly abolishing the IRS still won't stop the Fed from printing more and more money.  The US's industrial base has been gutted almost completely so that right there stops one possible advantage of inflation that would otherwise make US goods cheaper.  Everything is made dirt-cheap(and dirt quality) in China, so with those increased import prices, that means higher actual taxed amount. 

Like 240 said as well, what of those who wish to finance a car, obtain a mortgage, or otherwise get a material good through financing?  You'd end up financing even more due to the increased tax rate.  I personally believe the Credit system is terrible and keeps a lot more people poor than they otherwise should, but it is there and it looms heavily on us all. 

I don't make a lot of money, but I do live comfortably enough.  Basically, it'd come down to number crunching.  Would I save more by having my taxes appropriated from me via income tax, or see everything with a 23% increase?  In addition, the Black Market price may even RISE to stay just below the taxed item prices. 

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #52 on: December 27, 2007, 04:56:18 PM »
Great stuff here.  How would inflation come into play in this?  Having this flat tax and possibly abolishing the IRS still won't stop the Fed from printing more and more money.  The US's industrial base has been gutted almost completely so that right there stops one possible advantage of inflation that would otherwise make US goods cheaper.  Everything is made dirt-cheap(and dirt quality) in China, so with those increased import prices, that means higher actual taxed amount. 

Like 240 said as well, what of those who wish to finance a car, obtain a mortgage, or otherwise get a material good through financing?  You'd end up financing even more due to the increased tax rate.  I personally believe the Credit system is terrible and keeps a lot more people poor than they otherwise should, but it is there and it looms heavily on us all. 
I don't make a lot of money, but I do live comfortably enough.  Basically, it'd come down to number crunching.  Would I save more by having my taxes appropriated from me via income tax, or see everything with a 23% increase?  In addition, the Black Market price may even RISE to stay just below the taxed item prices. 
That is a good point.  Credit spending will rise to new levels.  The US already has a negative savings rate.  People live well beyond their means.  Just look at the mortgage problem.  Everyone wants to live like they are wealthy when the fact of the matter is that most of us are average earners making less in real dollars than our parents earned.

Remember, the 23% rate is a provisional fiction designed to appeal to the masses. 


240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #53 on: December 27, 2007, 05:44:00 PM »
Remember, the 23% rate is a provisional fiction designed to appeal to the masses. 

IMO, it's designed to appeal to the rich, republican voting base (The Forbians) that uses economic policy to select their candidate. 

They'd LOVE to get 4 years off paying taxes, damn the longterm consequences to the USA.

Ozark

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 222
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #54 on: December 28, 2007, 04:38:02 AM »
The only debate you have any chance of winning is the one where you make my arguments for me, like above with the Hillary nonsense.

Decker Dummy,  you are too easy, so you are saying she did not say these things ?

watch :
http://youtube.com/watch?v=yzBvQ9EeF3k


I have a pretty good idea about what tax avoidance and evasion are.  I'm a tax lawyer.

well if this is true, then we all now see why you are against such a change, as it would hurt your income .


The FairTax ends all record keeping and income tax filings of any kind for individuals, totally insulating them from the high costs and abusive tactics of tax preparers.    Bad for Decker   :o

It is estimated that Americans spend at least $265 billion a year to comply with the tax code -- nearly $900 for every man, woman, and child in America. That is greater than the current federal deficit ($205 billion). Billions of dollars in compliance costs are wasted each year, and we have nothing of value to show for this expenditure -- not one single productive service or product is added to our nation’s wealth. It is estimated that the FairTax dramatically cuts such compliance costs, perhaps as much as 95 percent. Bad for Decker   :o   :o

There are, of course, still some people who are involved in sales tax return preparation and sales tax administration under the FairTax, but many fewer than those involved with the income tax today. Those tax preparers, tax lawyers, and Internal Revenue Service employees, who are typically well educated and well equipped with transferable skills, will have to find other, more productive work. The projected 10.5 percent growth in the economy during the first year of the FairTax will provide plenty of new jobs.    Very bad for Decker   :o   :o   :o

You on the other hand haven't a clue about what you write about and your desperate cutting and pasting just drives that point home.

nice try again Decker Dummy, I have put links and the truth to all of your lies and attacks, each time you try to throw shit on the wall. I clean the wall with the facts, but continue as you will, this is fun making a fool of you.  ;D

And once again you do not answer the question.  Why should criminals suddenly pay this absurd 23% sales tax when they can create/take advantage of untaxed black market items?

once again Decker Dummy, you say this as though the wealthy pay their honest  amount of Taxes currently.
read slowly this time lib :
Tax evasion is chronic under any system so complex as to be incomprehensible. As a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), tax evasion in 2001 was beyond 2.6 percent, compared to 1.6 percent in 1991. This represents over 16 percent of taxes due. Almost 40 percent of the public, according to the IRS, is out of compliance with the present tax system, mostly unintentionally due to the enormous complexity of the present system. These IRS figures do not include taxes lost on illegal sources of income with a criminal economy estimated at a trillion dollars. All this, despite a major enforcement effort and assessment of tens of millions of civil penalties on American taxpayers in an effort to force compliance with the tax system. Disrespect for the tax system and the law has reached dangerous levels and makes a system based on taxpayer self-assessment less and less viable.

The FairTax reduces rather than increases the problem of tax evasion. The increased fairness, transparency, and legitimacy of the system induces more compliance. The roughly 90-percent reduction in filers enables tax administrators more narrowly and effectively to address noncompliance and increases the likelihood of tax evasion discovery. The relative simplicity of the FairTax promotes compliance. Businesses need answer only one question to determine the tax due: How much was sold to consumers? Finally, because tax rates decrease, tax evasion is less profitable; and because of the dramatic reduction in the number of tax filers, tax evaders are more easily monitored and caught under the FairTax system.



Why should the wealthy pay any tax when they can incorporate in the US to have a US source income and live abroad?

people moving abroad ? no way, oh you mean like all of the Corporations that have been moving abroad in the last 10 years, for their Benefit, the latest being  Haliburton, and all the factories moving to Mexico, South America, India, and etc..... 
Once again Decker Dummy, your argument is  empty.



So you advocate another big government welfare program?  Your numbers don't add up.

wrong again Decker Dummy..........

Administration
The Social Security Administration (SSA) will send out the monthly prebate on or before the first day of every month. Prebate payments can only be made to persons 18 years or older. If a family wishes to designate more than one person to receive the prebate, then the prebate payment will be divided evenly among those persons designated. Example: Two single people sharing the same residence are able to each get a prebate check.
Registration renewal
After the initial registration, any qualified family that fails to renew its registration each year, within 30 days of the family determination date, will cease receiving the prebate 90 days following the failure to register. However, the family can file to get up to six months of missed prebate checks later (with no interest on missed payments). A possible method of assigning registration renewal dates would be on the birth date of the person filing the application. 30 or more days before the annual registration date, the sales tax authority is required to mail a proposed registration to each qualified family that simply needs to be signed and mailed back in if the family’s circumstances have not changed.
Administrative cost
In accordance with instructions from each qualified family, SSA will provide the prebate in the form of a paper check via U.S. Mail, an electronic funds transfer to a bank account, or a “smart card” that can be used much like a bank debit card. (This method is already in use to provide other benefits from the federal government.) The National Taxpayers Union estimated that the cost of mailing monthly prebate checks via the U.S. Postal Service would be approximately $225 million. To the extent SSA uses electronic funds transfer and “smart card” technology, this amount would be reduced accordingly.
Fraud prevention
When the state sales tax authorities process the prebate applications they will validate all names and Social Security numbers against the SSA database. States already do this in relation to the administration of other state/federal cooperative programs such as unemployment benefits and child support enforcement. They will also check for duplicate Social Security numbers being claimed by different households to prevent more than one household from listing the same person as a household member. Any duplicate Social Security numbers will have to be resolved before the prebate payment is made.
It is unlawful to willingly and knowingly file a false prebate claim. HR 25 provides for both civil and criminal penalties. The civil penalty is equal to the greater of $500 or 50 percent of the claimed annual prebate amount not actually due, plus repayment of any falsely due prebate amounts. A criminal penalty of imprisonment for up to one year may also be imposed.
Fiscal impact
The number of households for 2007 is estimated to be 113 million. Assuming 100 percent participation, the cost of the prebate is estimated to be $489 billion for 2007 (assuming that all legally resident households participate). This amount is about half of the amount of tax expenditures (standard deductions, personal exemptions, Earned Income Tax Credit, mortgage interest and charitable deductions, and various other tax preferences) doled out under the current federal income tax system that are repealed when the FairTax is enacted. For 2006, the total of all of these tax breaks exceeded $945 billion (estimate by the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation,



Now here's a challenging cut and paste of yours.  There will still be a need for a branch of the federal government for enforcement of your asinine tax proposal.  It's a federal tax...not a state tax.  It is the province of our federal sovereignty and not the states.  Your simplistic argument, if I can call it that, makes no sense except to one such as yourself.

once again Lib :
How is the tax collected?
Retail businesses collect the tax from the consumer, just as state sales tax systems already do in 45 states; the FairTax is simply an additional line on the current sales tax reporting form. Retailers simply collect the tax and send it to the state taxing authority. All businesses serving as collection agents receive a fee for collection, and the states also receive a collection fee. The tax revenues from the states are then sent to the U.S. Treasury.


It makes the administrative costs of businesses in that state much lower. The state is paid a one-quarter of one percent fee by the federal government to collect the tax. For states that already collect a sales tax, this fee proves generous. A state can choose not to collect the federal sales tax, and either outsource the collection to another state, or opt to have the federal government collect it directly. If a state chooses to conform to the federal tax base, they will raise the same amount of state sales tax with a lower tax rate -- in some cases more than 50 percent lower -- since the FairTax base is broader than their current tax base. States may also consider the reduction or elimination of property taxes by keeping their sales tax rate at or near where it is currently. Finally, conforming states that are part of the FairTax system will find collection of sales tax on Internet and mail-order retail sales greatly simplified.

The increased fairness, transparency, and legitimacy of the system induces more compliance. The roughly 90-percent reduction in filers enables tax administrators more narrowly and effectively to address noncompliance and increases the likelihood of tax evasion discovery. The relative simplicity of the FairTax promotes compliance. Businesses need answer only one question to determine the tax due: How much was sold to consumers? Finally, because tax rates decrease, tax evasion is less profitable; and because of the dramatic reduction in the number of tax filers, tax evaders are more easily monitored and caught under the FairTax system


The truth: More than 80% of all tax returns are eliminated under the FairTax--every individual filing. What remains are retail outlets collecting the FairTax. Of these, 80 percent of all retails sales now occur at large retail chains like Wal-Mart. The point is oversight will still reside under the Treasury Department but the government's responsibility will be over a far smaller "universe" of tax collection points making compliance oversight far less costly and far more effective than the current system which costs $265 billion a year in compliance costs and still comes up $350 billion a year short of what is owed.



And speaking of retarded, You mention this billionaire and spending 10,000,000.  How on god's green earth is that not a drastic reduction in tax revenue to the government?  You see no difference between taxing 36% of total eligible income or 23% of income spent.  The gov. will be severly underfunded.

Nice try Lib, you being a Tax Lawyer,  you know very well, that  the rich dont pay 36 % percent of thier income in taxes, they pay accountants $$$$ to get that down to sometimes half that, and many times even lower than half, notice you used the word "eligible income "   ::)

Plus, their are billions hidden in foreign accounts, that could be brought back into our economy, increasing revenue, and as stated earlier, it would allow a greater collection of tax money from those carrying out illegal transactions, since their income is hid from the income tax system but will be taxed when they spend it in a sales tax. Drug dealers, prostitutes, black market dealers, and bookies are examples of people who earn income illegally. Since these and others engaging in illegal transactions obviously don't want the government to know about their activities, the income generated won't be reported on income tax returns. Thus, none of that money is subject to tax. However, with a sales tax, it doesn't matter how money is earned, since the tax is collected immediately by the seller.




But then again, you're pushing bullshit b/c you believe bullshit.  Scrap the Code!  Scrap the IRS!


The real truth  :Poor Decker Dummy  does not want to lose his job   :o   :o   :o   :o   :o   :o

Your childish banter shows me a level of sophistication of thought approaching that of an excited addle-minded teenager.

nice try Decker Dummy, we now both know the true reason for your hate of the Fair Tax, people wont need crooks Tax Lawyers  much anymore.   Then Decker will be saying in his new career......... " would you like to supersize that order ? "


You got me shakin' in my boots little lady.

Wow,  a lawyer trying to put someone down ? who would have thought.....   :o   :o



Ozark

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 222
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #55 on: December 28, 2007, 04:52:22 AM »
Quote
Great stuff here.  How would inflation come into play in this?  Having this flat tax and possibly abolishing the IRS still won't stop the Fed from printing more and more money.  The US's industrial base has been gutted almost completely so that right there stops one possible advantage of inflation that would otherwise make US goods cheaper.  Everything is made dirt-cheap(and dirt quality) in China, so with those increased import prices, that means higher actual taxed amount.

Like 240 said as well, what of those who wish to finance a car, obtain a mortgage, or otherwise get a material good through financing?  You'd end up financing even more due to the increased tax rate.  I personally believe the Credit system is terrible and keeps a lot more people poor than they otherwise should, but it is there and it looms heavily on us all.

I don't make a lot of money, but I do live comfortably enough.  Basically, it'd come down to number crunching.  Would I save more by having my taxes appropriated from me via income tax, or see everything with a 23% increase?  In addition, the Black Market price may even RISE to stay just below the taxed item prices.


How does the plan affect economic growth?


With the penalty for working harder and producing more removed, Americans are free to keep every dollar they earn, and a new era of economic growth and job creation is unleashed. Hidden taxes are history, Americans are able to save more, and businesses invest more. Capital formation, the real source of job creation and innovation, is facilitated. Gross domestic product (GDP) increases by an estimated 10.5 percent in the first year alone. The FairTax as proposed raises the economy’s capital stock by 42 percent, its labor supply by 4 percent, its output by 12 percent, and its real wage rate by 8 percent.

As U.S. companies and individuals repatriate, on a tax-free basis, income generated overseas, huge amounts of new capital flood into the United States. With such a huge capital supply, real interest rates remain low. Additionally, other international investors will seek to invest here to avoid taxes on income in their own countries, thereby further spurring the growth of our own economy.

How does the FairTax affect wages and prices?

Americans who produce goods and earn wages must pay significant tax and compliance costs under the current federal income tax. These taxes and costs both reduce after-tax wages and profits and are then passed on to the consumers of those goods and services in the form of price increases. When the FairTax removes income, capital gains, payroll, and estate and gift taxes, the pre-FairTax prices of these goods and services will fall. The removal of these hidden taxes may also allow wages to rise. Exactly how much prices will fall and wages will rise depends on market forces. For example, in a profession with many jobs and too few to fill them, wages will likely increase more than in fields where there are too many employees and not enough jobs.

How does this affect U.S. competitiveness in foreign trade?

Because the FairTax is automatically border adjustable, the 17 percent competitive advantage, on average, of foreign producers is eliminated, immediately boosting U.S. competitiveness overseas. American companies doing business internationally are able to sell their goods at lower prices but at similar margins, and this brings jobs to America.

In addition, U.S. companies with investments or plants abroad bring home overseas profits without the penalty of paying income taxes, thus resulting in more U.S. capital investment.

And at last, imports and domestic production are on a level playing field. Exported goods are not subject to the FairTax, since they are not consumed in the U.S.; but imported goods sold in the U.S. are subject to the FairTax because these products are consumed domestically.

How does the income tax affect our economy?

How does dragging an anchor affect the speed of a ship? Our entire economy is not dependent on the income tax. Instead, our economy is held back by the income tax. There was no income tax for the first 124 years of our history -- that’s more than half the time we have existed as a nation. A study by the Government Accountability Office estimated that the federal tax system imposed efficiency costs on the U.S. economy of two to five percent of GDP. Under the FairTax, within ten years average Americans will be at least 10 percent and probably 15 percent better off than they would be under the current system. That translates to an increase of $3,000 to $4,500 per household, per year.

What about the home mortgage ?

The FairTax has positive effects on residential real estate far beyond this narrow question. Today’s homeowners, if they itemize (and 70 percent do not), pay their interest with post-Social Security/pre-income tax dollars. They then pay their principal with post-SS/post-income tax dollars. Those who do not itemize get no advantages at all. Under the FairTax, all homeowners make their entire house payment with pre-tax dollars.

With the FairTax, mortgage interest rates fall by about 25 percent (about 1.75 points) as bank overhead falls; this is a huge savings for consumers. For example, on a $150,000, thirty-year home mortgage at an interest rate of 7.00 percent, the monthly mortgage payment is $999.12 for principal and interest. On that same mortgage at a 5.25 percent interest rate, the monthly payment is $830.01. Over 30 years, the 1.75-percent decrease in interest rates in this instance results in a $60,879 cost savings to the consumer. Finally, first-time buyers save for that down payment much faster, as savings are not taxed.

Under the FairTax, home ownership is a possibility for many who have never had that option under the income tax system. Lower interest rates, the repeal of the income tax, the repeal of all payroll taxes, and the prebate mean that people have more money to spend and have an increased opportunity to become homeowners.


Do corporations get a windfall with the abolition of the corporate tax?


Corporations are legal fictions that have not, do not, and never will bear the burden of taxation. Only people pay taxes. Corporations pass on their tax burden in the form of higher prices to consumers, lower wages to workers, and/or lower returns to investors. The idea that taxing a corporation reduces taxes on, say the working poor, is a cruel hoax. A corporate tax only makes what the working poor buy more expensive, costs them jobs, lowers their lifestyle, or delays their retirement. Under the FairTax Plan, money retained in the business and reinvested to create jobs, build factories, or develop new technologies, pays no tax. This is the most honest, fair, productive tax system possible. Free market competition will do the rest.

How does the plan affect economic growth?

With the penalty for working harder and producing more removed, Americans are free to keep every dollar they earn, and a new era of economic growth and job creation is unleashed. Hidden taxes are history, Americans are able to save more, and businesses invest more. Capital formation, the real source of job creation and innovation, is facilitated. Gross domestic product (GDP) increases by an estimated 10.5 percent in the first year alone. The FairTax as proposed raises the economy’s capital stock by 42 percent, its labor supply by 4 percent, its output by 12 percent, and its real wage rate by 8 percent.

As U.S. companies and individuals repatriate, on a tax-free basis, income generated overseas, huge amounts of new capital flood into the United States. With such a huge capital supply, real interest rates remain low. Additionally, other international investors will seek to invest here to avoid taxes on income in their own countries, thereby further spurring the growth of our own economy.


What economic changes come at the retail level with the FairTax?

Our baby boom generation has been trained to spend money before inflation eats it up or savings is taxed away. This group, for good or evil, will likely spend their initial pay raise. Others will recognize the advantages of savings and investment. There will be a whole new round of home refinancings. There will likely be a lot of interest in the actual cost of the federal government when consumers see their most recent contribution at the bottom of each retail receipt.

Since the FairTax plan is revenue neutral, the same amount of resources is extracted from the economy as is extracted under current law. These funds are, however, extracted in a less economically damaging way. Every known economic projection shows the economy doing better, often much better, under the FairTax.
Because the economy grows, is more efficient and more productive, that means investment, wages, and consumption are higher than they are under the income tax.

What happens to interest rates?

First, interest rates drop quickly by approximately one-quarter. Interest rates include compensation to the lender for the tax that they must pay on interest you pay them. That is why taxable bonds bear a higher interest rate than tax-exempt bonds. When the tax on interest is removed, interest rates will drop toward today’s tax-exempt rate.

Second, under the current system, savings and investments are taxed. Under the FairTax, savings and investments are not taxed at all. As Americans save more money, the pool of funds in lending institutions grows. When you add to this the flood of capital currently trapped offshore, we realize a huge increase in the pool of capital, thereby causing the cost of borrowing funds to drop.

What happens to the stock market, mutual funds, and retirement funds?


Investors prosper greatly under this plan, since corporations face lower operating costs and individuals have more money to save and invest. The reform significantly enhances the retirement savings and/or retirement spending power of most Americans. The purchase of stocks is considered a purchase for investment purposes and not personal consumption so they are purchased tax free. The service fees charged by the broker, however, are personal consumption and therefore subject to tax.

How does this affect U.S. competitiveness in foreign trade?

Because the FairTax is automatically border adjustable, the 17 percent competitive advantage, on average, of foreign producers is eliminated, immediately boosting U.S. competitiveness overseas. American companies doing business internationally are able to sell their goods at lower prices but at similar margins, and this brings jobs to America.

In addition, U.S. companies with investments or plants abroad bring home overseas profits without the penalty of paying income taxes, thus resulting in more U.S. capital investment.

And at last, imports and domestic production are on a level playing field. Exported goods are not subject to the FairTax, since they are not consumed in the U.S.; but imported goods sold in the U.S. are subject to the FairTax because these products are consumed domestically.

What about border issues?

It is unlikely that “shopping across the border” in Canada or Mexico will result in any cost savings to the consumer. Remember, the FairTax is revenue neutral and therefore price neutral. This means the relative cost of retail goods and services after the FairTax remains very close to the same levels found in the marketplace today. With regard to interstate competition, since all states have the same federal sales tax rate, the federal sales tax is not an incentive to cross state lines to avoid the tax.

What other significant economies use such a tax plan?

Two of the largest economies in the world rely almost solely on sales taxes: Florida and Texas. Many civilizations in history have relied solely on transaction-based consumption taxes: A percentage of a grain shipment in exchange for a safe harbor. Even a cursory study of history shows that nation/states that relied on consumption taxes flourished and prospered, supported democracies/republics, had expanding economies, and high levels of civil rights for their citizens. The exact opposite is true for empires that relied on income/poll/head taxes. These taxes were used to support despots, eventually collapsed the economies in which they were applied, and sundered civil rights.

The sales tax is a familiar tax, being a major source of revenue in 45 states and the District of Columbia. It is true, however, that no post-industrial nation, until now, has ever repealed its income tax and replaced it with a federal retail sales tax. However, England did repeal its detested income tax upon the defeat of Napoleon and enjoyed the fastest, longest expansion of its economy in its long history. An expansion that ended only with the -- you guessed it -- re-imposition of an income tax.

No other country has a system of government like ours, and no other country has led the world in so many fields as ours. It was France and Germany that forced the imposition of a VAT in addition to income taxes across the European Community. Shall we follow France’s lead?

In contrast, we can observe the Irish Miracle that stems from their refusal to join the EU members in imposing high tax rates and their choice to follow their own path on taxation. Thus, we should simply strive to have the best tax system, period.

Is the FairTax just another conservative tax scheme? Or just another liberal tax scheme?

The FairTax has nonpartisan support from people in all walks of life. From both major parties and several third parties. Its supporters need only have one common belief: That it is a fairer, simpler, more efficient way to raise federal revenue. The FairTax delivers these benefits to all American people and more. More government accountability for taxpayer dollars, a tax system that is less susceptible to being manipulated by special interests, a tax system that will make it easier -- not harder -- for the average person to get ahead, and perhaps most importantly, a tax system that provides real, honest, and transparent tax relief for those who need it most.

How does the income tax affect our economy?

How does dragging an anchor affect the speed of a ship? Our entire economy is not dependent on the income tax. Instead, our economy is held back by the income tax. There was no income tax for the first 124 years of our history -- that’s more than half the time we have existed as a nation. A study by the Government Accountability Office estimated that the federal tax system imposed efficiency costs on the U.S. economy of two to five percent of GDP. Under the FairTax, within ten years average Americans will be at least 10 percent and probably 15 percent better off than they would be under the current system. That translates to an increase of $3,000 to $4,500 per household, per year.

How does this plan affect compliance costs?

It is estimated that Americans spend at least $265 billion a year to comply with the tax code -- nearly $900 for every man, woman, and child in America. That is greater than the current federal deficit ($205 billion). Billions of dollars in compliance costs are wasted each year, and we have nothing of value to show for this expenditure -- not one single productive service or product is added to our nation’s wealth. It is estimated that the FairTax dramatically cuts such compliance costs, perhaps as much as 95 percent.


What about value-added taxes (VATs), like they have in Europe and Canada? Are they not consumption taxes?

While VATs are also consumption taxes, and better than income taxes, the FairTax is not a VAT. A VAT works very differently. It taxes every stage of production. It is much more complex and is typically hidden from the retail consumer. Second, in industrialized countries that have a VAT, it coexists with high-rate income tax, payroll, and many other taxes that, in some instances, have led to marginal tax rates as high as 70 percent. Third, all other industrialized countries, except Australia and Japan, have a much larger tax burden than the U.S., which requires higher rates and makes tax administration much more difficult. Lastly, a VAT is a lobbyist’s dream, allowing them to install their loopholes unbeknownst to the purchaser. A retail sales tax, in contrast, is a lobbyist’s nightmare, applied as it is under the bright lights of the retail counter.

I know the FairTax rate is 23 percent when compared to current income and Social Security rate quotes. What is the rate of the sales tax at the retail counter?

30 percent. This issue is often confusing, so we explain more here.

When income tax rates are quoted, economists call that a tax-inclusive quote: “I paid 23 percent last year.” For every $100 earned, $23 went to Uncle Sam. Or, “I had to make $130 to have $100 to spend.” That’s a 23-percent tax-inclusive rate.

We choose to compare the FairTax to income taxes, quoting the rate the same way, because the FairTax replaces such taxes. That rate is 23 percent.



Sales taxes, on the other hand, are generally quoted tax exclusive: “I bought a $77 shirt and had to pay that same $23 in sales tax." This is a 30-percent sales tax. Or, “I spent a dollar, 77˘ for the product and 23˘ in tax.” This rate, when programmed into a point-of-purchase terminal, is 30 percent.

Note that no matter which way it is quoted, the amount of tax is the same. Under an income tax rate of 23 percent, you have to earn $130 to spend $100.

Spend that same $100 under a sales tax, you pay that same tax of $30, and the rate is quoted as 30 percent.

Perhaps the biggest difference between the two is that under the income tax, controlling the amount of tax you pay is a complex nightmare. Under the FairTax, you may simply choose not to spend, or to spend less.


Quote
Like 240 said as well, what of those who wish to finance a car, obtain a mortgage, or otherwise get a material good through financing?  You'd end up financing even more due to the increased tax rate.  I personally believe the Credit system is terrible and keeps a lot more people poor than they otherwise should, but it is there and it looms heavily on us all.

The good news is, that sales price will be lower, due to the fact that the price of the car will no longer include all of those embedded taxes (you know, taxes and costs added to the price of the car all along the manufacturing line and up through the retail level)

The purchasing costs of a new car are predicted to be lower by about 10% (14% for self-employed people), and that lower amount INCLUDES the FairTax. There is a chart in the FairTax.org website, a white paper under Industries/automobiles, that shows this prediction. It shows the total new car cost, including taxes, to be $43,537 under the present income tax system, and $39,160 under the FairTax, a difference of $4,377. That difference amounts to 10.05% less under the FairTax.

Another reason for a lower price under the FairTax is interest rates. Interest rates are projected to fall 25-35% under the FairTax, which would be a substantial amount given the high price of new cars today.

Also, you will be buying this new car with pre-tax dollars, thereby increasing your buying power.

Ozark

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 222
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #56 on: December 28, 2007, 06:49:04 AM »
Quote
IMO, it's designed to appeal to the rich, republican voting base (The Forbians) that uses economic policy to select their candidate.

They'd LOVE to get 4 years off paying taxes, damn the longterm consequences to the USA.

wrong 240,

many Republicans are against this, so you cant say that .

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


If the FairTax were passed by Congress and you were President, would you sign the bill into law?



Rudy Giuliani               No



Mike Huckabee             Yes



John McCain                 No


Ron Paul                      Yes      "I'll vote for the FairTax if it comes up.."  http://easylink.playstream.com/fairtax/RonPaul-FairTax.wvx


Mitt Romney                 No



Fred Thompson             Noncommittal


Democrat Mike Gravel     Yes         "I subscribe to a sales tax system, most of which is included in what is called the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax meets the fairness criteria: simplicity, transparency and no exceptions."    http://www.gravel2008.us/?q=fair_tax




240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #57 on: December 28, 2007, 06:57:44 AM »
most repub candidates are against it.  most repubs are against it.

IMO, someone whispered in huck's ear that he could grab up a chunk of like-minded power player donations if he suddenly made this a huge platform issue.

A week away from Iowa, he's winning and has momentum, and suddenly he rocks the boat with something like this?  Not something you'd think he'd do when ahead.  Unless he was motivated properly.

Ozark

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 222
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #58 on: December 28, 2007, 07:07:16 AM »
Quote
most repub candidates are against it.  most repubs are against it.

IMO, someone whispered in huck's ear that he could grab up a chunk of like-minded power player donations if he suddenly made this a huge platform issue.

A week away from Iowa, he's winning and has momentum, and suddenly he rocks the boat with something like this?  Not something you'd think he'd do when ahead.  Unless he was motivated properly.

Once again 240, you are wrong,

Huckabee has had the "Fair Tax" in his platform from the beginning of his Candidacy for President.

and his support is coming from people who think Romney and Giuliani are not conservative enough on social issues, not from his support of the "Fair Tax".


Based on Huckabee's record as Governor, I think he would be a terrible President,







Vote for Ron Paul

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #59 on: December 28, 2007, 07:09:34 AM »
lol... finally we agree on something!

Ron Paul.

Ozark

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 222
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #60 on: December 28, 2007, 07:52:04 AM »
From Democrat Mike Gravel's Website :


http://www.gravel2008.us/?q=fair_tax


Fair Tax

DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE MIKE GRAVEL IS FOR REAL TAX REFORM:

    * ABOLISH THE INCOME TAX AND THE IRS
    * SET UP A PROGRESSIVE SALES TAX

 

It’s called a FAIR TAX.

The way in which a government raises revenue is a critical indication of how fair it will be to its citizens.

The U.S. Income Tax system is unfair to its citizens and crippling to the economy.

Both the Income Tax and the Sales Tax systems are generically progressive:

    * with Income, you’re taxed on what you earn
    * with Sales, you’re taxed on what you spend

But the U.S. Income Tax system is unfair and regressive because Americans earning less than $97,400 pay a larger portion of their income in taxes than those who earn more than $97,400.

The following applies to both Income and Sales tax systems:

    * To be fair, a tax system must have total transparency––each taxpayer must know what s/he is paying and what everyone else is paying.
    * To be fair, a tax system cannot have any exceptions. One exception opens the door to those who can afford to game the system.
    * To be fair, a tax system must be simple. The more complex it is, the easier it is to game the system.

Our income tax code is riddled with exceptions and incentives that the 30,000 lobbyists in Washington have secured and continue to secure for their clients. Little wonder the code is incomprehensible and has a compliance cost to the private sector of $270 billion a year.

After serving eight years on the Senate Finance Committee, my choice to meet the fairness criteria is to junk the income tax with all its exceptions, close the IRS, and establish a sales tax––without exceptions.

Much demagoguery swirls around issues of taxation:

    * “Soak the rich” is one approach, but it never happens regardless of whether the liberals or conservatives hold political power. The wealthy have the money to game the system.
    * “Tax the corporations” is another approach, but corporate taxes are built into the cost of products or services, so consumers are actually paying those taxes, too. It’s a hidden sales tax.

I subscribe to a sales tax system, most of which is included in what is called the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax meets the fairness criteria: simplicity, transparency and no exceptions.

What sales tax rate will be applied to all new products and services?

The goal is to keep tax reform revenue-neutral. It is not a tax-cut program. Whatever the tax rate on new goods and services that will produce the same amount of money currently raised by the income tax is the sales tax rate. Best estimates indicate that the rate would be somewhere between 20 and 25%. Also, best estimates indicate that it would take a year to transition from one system to the other.

The PREBATE

One of the most exciting features of the Fair Tax is the monthly payments to individuals and/or families to reimburse them for the tax they pay on the essentials of life (food, shelter, clothing, medicine). The amount of the Prebate is calculated by multiplying the cost of essentials by the tax rate. The resulting tax is divided into 12 equal payments and sent on the first of each month to consumers who have registered annually for the program. The progressiveness of the Fair Tax can be determined by adjusting the amounts selected for the prices paid for essentials, which should not be taxed in the first place. However, giving these essentials an exception from the sales tax opens the door for wealth to game the system and we are back with the problems we have in the income tax system.

The Congress will never enact such a radical reform because it dilutes their power to control and focus the economy to accomplish social goals and ,of course, limits their ability of Congress to reward their special-interest friends who donate money to their political campaigns. In my judgment, Americans will have to vote to enact the National Initiative, becoming legislators like their elected lawmakers, in order to make the Fair Tax the law of the land. (www.NationalInitiative.u s)

Fair Tax Facts

Taxes you on what you spend––not on what you earn. So American consumers with low or moderate incomes will automatically pay less in taxes.

Government revenues from individuals are presently funded by payroll deductions from 110 million workers, and from corporate taxes. Under the Fair Tax, government revenues will be funded by more than 300 million consumers, including visiting tourists, and tax cheats who previously reported little or nothing to the IRS.

Eliminates federal deductions on your paycheck for income taxes, Social Security and Medicare.

Social Security and Medicare will be fully funded by the Fair Tax

Restores individual privacy. The government no longer needs to know where you work, what you earn, or what you do with your earnings.

Saves up to $270 billion per year that federal tax compliance currently costs our economy.

Dramatically reduces the price of new products and services, estimated at 20-25%, because corporations no longer need to hide these costs in the retail prices that are now passed on to consumers. This reduction equals the present income taxes being paid.

Creates jobs and economic growth in the U.S. by reducing operating costs to companies.

Encourages international investment in the American economy.

Businesses, and state and local governments collecting the sales tax will keep a small percentage to reimburse themselves for the cost of collecting and forwarding the funds to the U.S. Treasury.

Encourages the re-use products and the purchase of tax-free, pre-owned products.

Changes our consumption-based economy to a savings-based economy, warding off the oncoming fiscal crisis over commercial and private debt.

Saves about 300,000 trees each year that are currently needed to produce all the paperwork for IRS compliance and tax forms


Makes U.S. goods more competitive overseas and more affordable at home, thereby increasing job creation while reducing our balance of payments deficit.

Eliminates corporate taxes and the costs of compliance. These costs are currently hidden in the price consumers pay for the company’s product or services

Changes the American economy – the largest economic entity in the world – into the largest tax haven in the world, enticing international investments in the American economy. Also creates a level of growth (estimated at 10%) and prosperity that will permit the nation to lower government debt and balance the budget, better finance education, health care, transportation, and the rebuilding of our national infrastructure.

Ozark

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 222
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #61 on: December 28, 2007, 08:08:31 AM »
Quote
lol... finally we agree on something!

Ron Paul.

240,

If you support Ron Paul, then please watch this video :

http://easylink.playstream.com/fairtax/RonPaul-FairTax.wvx

and give your comment

 :)

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #62 on: December 28, 2007, 01:48:10 PM »
I've had the pleasure of slapping you around in this "debate" and now it is time to put an end to your crapola.

Look at the Clinton statement that you addressed and answered below, you can't even maintain a train of thought to discuss this topic so I'll dispense with all your cut and paste propaganda and naive observations and meanderings. 

Oh yes, how old are you?  In your tortured mind 'lib' and 'Decker Dummy' are devastating attacks.  You're a punk.  I don't mind it if someone is witty or thoughtful but you are neither.  Your a sad tool of propaganda.



But I am here to help you out.  I believe in second chances and I'm going to give you one.



Since you never addressed my question to you about whether the Fair Tax's rate is inclusive or exclusive, I'll do it for you. 

For those of you reading this, I'm sorry that I have to ask and answer my own questions, but Ozark is incapable of maintaining a conversation.

The Fair Tax at the outset is a scam b/c the 23% rate is an inclusive tax rate.  That means that to get a 23% rate, the people scamming you are including the tax itself in the computation!  No sales tax in the US is computed that way--State Sales taxes across the country are exclusive.

Example: $100 for a radio and pay $30 in sales tax.  That should be a 30% sales tax right.  Not to the scam artists pushing the Fair Tax scam.  They call this a 23% tax b/c 23% of the final purchase price of $130 is the tax itself.

So the real rate is 30% right.  Wrong. 

These Fair Tax scammers use assumptions that would make the Social Security Privatizers blush:  The scammers assume a reduction of $300-500 billion dollars per year in annual government spending, they assume ZERO tax avoidance or evasion (there is a difference) and these scammers assume that the general public is too stupid to catch on to their shell game...Ozark, this includes you.

When you analyze the Fair Tax in with conservative assumptions, the inclusive rate is btn 35-43% and the exclusive tax rate would be between 50-100%.

To continue funding the bulk of existing federal programs, the new sales tax would have to be extremely high. An analysis by researchers at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy estimates that the sales tax rate required for revenue neutrality in 2005 would be between 45 and 53 percent, with higher sales tax rates in subsequent years. An analysis by the Brookings Institution found that matching expected federal revenues over the next decade with a national sales tax would require a sales tax rate of about 60 percent.

Doesn't look so good any more does it?

How would you like to buy a new house or car on mortgage/credit and pay an additional 45% or 50% of the price?

Now for the policy reasons that the Fair Tax is a scam.

+It would hurt the economy b/c people would stop buying new products to avoid the crushing tax.

+Black Markets will grow like a cancer across our country--cheaper untaxed goods

+Some form of federal collection and enforcement will be necessary:  whose going to oversee the welfare prebate checks and guage the accountability of collections?  Oh that's right, tax evasion will disappear.

And this is just scratching the surface.

Good luck with your Fair Tax Scam...you and your plutocratic comrades will need it.






Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #63 on: December 28, 2007, 01:52:05 PM »
From Democrat Mike Gravel's Website :


http://www.gravel2008.us/?q=fair_tax


Fair Tax



...But the U.S. Income Tax system is unfair and regressive because Americans earning less than $97,400 pay a larger portion of their income in taxes than those who earn more than $97,400.

....
Right off the bat you're wrong. 

The US income tax is progressive--not regressive--b/c as income rises so does the rate of taxation--that is the definition of progressive rates whereas regressive rates are flat.  It looks like your $97,400 is a mistatement of the Social Security wage base.  I think you are referring to payroll taxes instead of income taxes.

I'm here to help you. 

Ozark

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 222
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #64 on: December 28, 2007, 04:46:32 PM »
I've had the pleasure of slapping you around in this "debate" and now it is time to put an end to your crapola.

Want to take a poll on GetBig ? and see who got spanked ?

If  you have had pleasure, then you enjoy being made a fool of.  :o

Lets see, on one side, we have Ron Paul, who said  "Yes " he would vote for the Fair Tax

and on the other side, we have Decker, who is against it , who is a bloodsucking Tax Lawyer, who makes his living from the current tax code,  and would lose big time if the Fair Tax became law


Oh yes, how old are you?  In your tortured mind 'lib' and 'Decker Dummy' are devastating attacks.  You're a punk.  I don't mind it if someone is witty or thoughtful but you are neither.  Your a sad tool of propaganda.

You Decker, are a bloodsucking tax lawyer, who's self interest outweighs what is good for our Country, and you have the audacity to say I am a  tool of propaganda ?   LMFAO ! ! ! ! ! ! !


But I am here to help you out.  I believe in second chances and I'm going to give you one.

No, you are only here to try and spread lies and bullshit about the Fair Tax, in hopes of convincing  people that the Fair Tax is bad,  as your own livelihood depends on it, as you are a self centered, self righteous  piece of garbage.



Since you never addressed my question to you about whether the Fair Tax's rate is inclusive or exclusive, I'll do it for you.

For those of you reading this, I'm sorry that I have to ask and answer my own questions, but Ozark is incapable of maintaining a conversation.

The Fair Tax at the outset is a scam b/c the 23% rate is an inclusive tax rate.  That means that to get a 23% rate, the people scamming you are including the tax itself in the computation!  No sales tax in the US is computed that way--State Sales taxes across the country are exclusive.

Example: $100 for a radio and pay $30 in sales tax.  That should be a 30% sales tax right.  Not to the scam artists pushing the Fair Tax scam.  They call this a 23% tax b/c 23% of the final purchase price of $130 is the tax itself.

First of all used items, including houses, will not be taxed. Secondly the 30% exclusive tax rate (tax applied external to the actual price of the item) under The Fair Tax you refer to is the 23% inclusive tax rate included in the price of every item bought today. Consequently the dollar amount collected from the inclusive tax rate will become the 30% exclusive rate on an item with the Fair tax. Example: $100 item today includes 23% or $23 in hidden taxes. The actual cost is $77. That will be the price listed on the bill with The Fair Tax. The $23 in tax will be collected on that $77 for a rate of 30%(23/77). The bottom line is the dollar amount collected will be the same as it is with the inclusive tax rate collected on items today.

The FairTax Rate: a 23% tomato or a 30% tomato?


As the FairTax gains more national attention, questions have again arisen about whether the FairTax rate is 23 percent or 30 percent. In the toxic environment that often accompanies public policy debates, FairTax.org has even been accused by some of misleading the public, even though full descriptions of "tax-inclusive" and "tax-exclusive" calculations abound on our Web site. We hope the following explanation puts all such questions to rest -- at last.

Let’s use an example to illustrate the difference between tax-inclusive and tax-exclusive tax rates.

Assume there is a worker named Joe who earns $125 and spends all of his earnings. Let’s further assume that the government requires him to pay $25 in taxes.

If the government put a tax on Joe’s income, he would earn $125 before tax and would have $100 after tax to spend at the General Store. Thus, Joe has to earn $125 to have $100 to spend. Joe would also have to file an income tax return.

If the government put a tax on what Joe spends, he would earn $125 and would have $125 to spend at the store. Of the $125 paid by Joe to the storekeeper, $100 would be for the goods he bought at the store and $25 would be taxes that the storekeeper would send to the government. Joe would not have to file a tax return, as the storekeeper sends the tax in to the government.

Either way, Joe pays $25 in taxes and the government gets $25 in taxes. With a tax on income, Joe pays the $25 directly to the government, and with the tax on spending (sales tax), he pays the $25 in taxes indirectly when he buys something from the General Store. The General Store sends the tax that Joe paid to the government.



We  may report the tax rate as $25/$125 = 20 percent, which is the tax-inclusive rate (meaning that the tax is included in the base). Alternately, we may think of the tax rate as $25/$100 = 25 percent, which is the tax-exclusive rate (meaning the tax is excluded from the base). The 23 percent FairTax rate set out in HR 25/S 1025 is a tax-inclusive rate, as is the current personal income tax, whereas most state-level sales taxes are quoted on a tax-exclusive basis. For ease of comparison, FairTax.org gives the tax rate both ways. Both rates are relevant, since the FairTax is replacing an income tax system, and 23 percent correctly represents the tax burden compared to the current system.

These Fair Tax scammers use assumptions that would make the Social Security Privatizers blush:  The scammers assume a reduction of $300-500 billion dollars per year in annual government spending, they assume ZERO tax avoidance or evasion (there is a difference) and these scammers assume that the general public is too stupid to catch on to their shell game...Ozark, this includes you.

Decker is a Tax Lawyer, who makes a living out of people having a problem with the current tax code,  Do any of you on GetBig really think he would be for a new Fair Tax system, that would do away with  individuals and businesses having to file taxes, and needing his services ?
I think even the dumbest of the dumb can figure this one out, the answer is HELL NO ! ! !


When you analyze the Fair Tax in with conservative assumptions, the inclusive rate is btn 35-43% and the exclusive tax rate would be between 50-100%.

To continue funding the bulk of existing federal programs, the new sales tax would have to be extremely high. An analysis by researchers at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy estimates that the sales tax rate required for revenue neutrality in 2005 would be between 45 and 53 percent, with higher sales tax rates in subsequent years. An analysis by the Brookings Institution found that matching expected federal revenues over the next decade with a national sales tax would require a sales tax rate of about 60 percent.


 More than 80% of all tax returns are eliminated under the FairTax--every individual filing. What remains are retail outlets collecting the FairTax. Of these, 80 percent of all retails sales now occur at large retail chains like Wal-Mart. The point is oversight will still reside under the Treasury Department but the government's responsibility will be over a far smaller "universe" of tax collection points making compliance oversight far less costly and far more effective than the current system which costs $265 billion a year in compliance costs and still comes up $350 billion a year short of what is owed.


The FairTax rate of 23% (when calculated inclusively like income tax rates) has been thoroughly researched to provide all the revenues now collected under both the income tax system and through FICA payroll taxes. Reports otherwise are largely based on the President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform which declared the rate would have to be much higher. What the Panel failed to make clear in an amazingly shameless sleight-of-hand is that they never studied the FairTax legislation as it exists in pending legislation. They ignored $22 million of FairTax research and, instead, quietly devised their own national consumption tax which they loaded with the exemptions and deductions they felt were "politically realistic". They also failed to calculate the effects of elimination of the FICA tax on annual taxpayer burdens or on the distributional effects of the FairTax across the income spectrum. Upon completion--and after declaring a national consumption tax flawed--they then refused to publish their underlying assumptions and the top two former Senators who led the exercise found employment in K Street income tax lobbying firms.



Great public policy changes do not happen easily. We believe, however, in the promise of the Founding Fathers that this is a nation, "of, by and for the people". In the last year we have seen more Congressional co-sponsors come on board faster than ever before. We have seen five of eight GOP candidates and one Democratic candidate embrace the FairTax. With increased media coverage, as at least one candidate has made this a central plank of his campaign, more and more Americans have come to understand the powerful benefits the FairTax offers the nation. They are, in turn, joining our growing citizen army and are beginning to communicate their wishes to their elected officials. All of this progress is a consequence of the body politic first learning about and then accepting the FairTax. As our ranks grow such pressure will increase on Members of Congress and at some point, the voice of the people will eclipse the voices of the relatively small number of Washingtonians who profit working the income tax system at great cost to the nation. Enactment of the FairTax will require advanced citizenry and a resurgence of what has been too often forgotten--public policy can and should be driven by the public. All that is required is that we all dare to be fair and remind our elected official that they work for their constituents--not for the narrow self-interests of the tax writing committee, the lucrative tax lobby business or the academicians who have built careers around the complexity of the tax code.


Consumption is a more stable source of revenue than income, as shown in Figure 3. The chart compares the yearly changes in the tax bases for the income tax (adjusted gross income -- AGI) and the FairTax (personal consumption expenditures -- PCE) for years 1974 to 2004. PCE has always grown from year to year, whereas AGI dropped from 2000 to 2001 and from 2001 to 2002 -- two years in a row. The higher growth rates of AGI in boom years result in overspending and then when the economy slows down either budget cuts are needed or, what is more often the case, taxes are raised or the budget deficit increases.





Doesn't look so good any more does it?

Looks great to Ron Paul , he said he would vote for it. http://easylink.playstream.com/fairtax/RonPaul-FairTax.wvx

The one that it does not look good for is you, the self-centered. bloodsucking, tax lawyer, as you would be out of work.   :o

How does the FairTax affect income tax preparers, accountants ?

There are, of course, still some people who are involved in sales tax return preparation and sales tax administration under the FairTax, but many fewer than those involved with the income tax today. Those tax preparers, tax lawyers, and Internal Revenue Service employees, who are typically well educated and well equipped with transferable skills, will have to find other, more productive work. The projected 10.5 percent growth in the economy during the first year of the FairTax will provide plenty of new jobs.

and Decker does not want you to know this :

The heavy compliance costs of the income tax are like an anchor holding back economic growth. We have nothing to show for the $265 billion (greater than the current federal deficit -- $205 billion) that we spend each year measuring, tracking, sheltering, documenting, and filing our annual income. Surely these valuable labor and capital resources can be employed more productively -- for example, in following the money trails left by terrorist, drug, and other criminal enterprises, rather than in tracking every American wage earner.


How would you like to buy a new house or car on mortgage/credit and pay an additional 45% or 50% of the price?

Another lie from the blood sucking tax lawyer Decker

Here is the truth :

What about the home mortgage deduction?


The FairTax has positive effects on residential real estate far beyond this narrow question. Today’s homeowners, if they itemize (and 70 percent do not), pay their interest with post-Social Security/pre-income tax dollars. They then pay their principal with post-SS/post-income tax dollars. Those who do not itemize get no advantages at all. Under the FairTax, all homeowners make their entire house payment with pre-tax dollars.

With the FairTax, mortgage interest rates fall by about 25 percent (about 1.75 points) as bank overhead falls; this is a huge savings for consumers. For example, on a $150,000, thirty-year home mortgage at an interest rate of 7.00 percent, the monthly mortgage payment is $999.12 for principal and interest. On that same mortgage at a 5.25 percent interest rate, the monthly payment is $830.01. Over 30 years, the 1.75-percent decrease in interest rates in this instance results in a $60,879 cost savings to the consumer. Finally, first-time buyers save for that down payment much faster, as savings are not taxed.

Under the FairTax, home ownership is a possibility for many who have never had that option under the income tax system. Lower interest rates, the repeal of the income tax, the repeal of all payroll taxes, and the prebate mean that people have more money to spend and have an increased opportunity to become homeowners.


Now for the policy reasons that the Fair Tax is a scam.

+It would hurt the economy b/c people would stop buying new products to avoid the crushing tax.

another lie, addressed above

+Black Markets will grow like a cancer across our country--cheaper untaxed goods

another lie, read above


+Some form of federal collection and enforcement will be necessary:  whose going to oversee the welfare prebate checks and guage the accountability of collections?  Oh that's right, tax evasion will disappear.

another lie from Decker, here is the truth :

All businesses are tax collectors today. They withhold income and payroll taxes from their employees. Moreover, the vast majority of retail businesses operating in states with a sales tax (45 states currently use a sales tax) are already sales tax collectors. Under the FairTax, retailers are paid a fee equal to one-quarter of one percent of federal sales tax they collect and remit. In addition, of course, retailers no longer bear the cost of complying with the income tax, including the uniform capitalization requirements, the various depreciation schemes, and the various employee benefit and pension rules. Finally, the economic growth resulting from the aggregate, beneficial effects of dramatically lower income tax compliance costs and no payroll or income taxes, customers having substantially more money -- the greatest influence on retail sales -- and a reasonable fee for collecting the FairTax, all ensure that retailers do quite well.


How does the prebate work?

All valid Social Security cardholders who are U.S. residents receive a monthly prebate equivalent to the FairTax paid on essential goods and services, also known as the poverty level expenditures. The prebate is paid in advance, in equal installments each month. The size of the prebate is determined by the Department of Health & Human Services’ poverty level guideline multiplied by the tax rate. This is a well-accepted, long-used poverty-level calculation that includes food, clothing, shelter, transportation, medical care, etc.


And this is just scratching the surface.

Good luck with your Fair Tax Scam...you and your plutocratic comrades will need it.

You are the one who will need luck, when and if people get sick of the current system, and vote in someone like Ron Paul , and put bloodsucking scum like you out of a job.   ;D



and lastly , I say again, Decker is a bloodsucking Tax Lawyer, who makes a living out of people having  problems with the current tax code.

So the question is :  Do any of you on GetBig really think Decker would be for a new Fair Tax system, that would do away with individuals and businesses having to file taxes, and needing his services ?
I think even the dumbest of the dumb can figure this one out, the answer is HELL NO ! ! !





Vote for Ron Paul

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63956
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #65 on: December 28, 2007, 09:06:42 PM »
It depends on how you define poor.  First of all a word on the Heritage Foundation.  It's a fraud organization that has been shown to be disingenuous in its work product.  Daniel Mitchell is a supply-side nightmare.

Now on to the Fair sales tax.  It's a tax cut for the well to do and a tax hike for nearly everybody else that pays taxes.  That's a matter of fact.

How about buying a new car for $30,000?  With the Fair Tax, that car is almost $40,000.  Spread out those payments with interest and you'll see what I mean.

Are you liquid enough to buy a car with one payment?  The wealthy are.

Kiss off your deductions and write-offs.  They are gone.

How about buying a hundred dollars of groceries for the week....make that $123 plus State and Local taxes.

Won't a 23% sales tax create a massive Black Market for goods?

The country can't afford wasting time with this kind of nonsense.





Why would you need write-offs and deductions if there is no income tax? 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63956
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #66 on: December 28, 2007, 09:19:57 PM »
my first choice is to do away with the IRS altogether as Ron Paul wants to do,

but as far as a fair tax, it is better than the current tax system :

 Pros:

  1.  A national sales tax discourages consumption, leading to a conservation of resources.
   2. The removal of an income tax encourages saving and investing, which is the key to job growth.
   3. Individuals would have an extra incentive to work hard and earn income, leading to a far more productive nation.
   4. A sales tax would be a much simpler system, eliminating the need for individuals to comply with complex tax reporting requirements and freeing up all the money & time lost on the income tax process.
   5. Tax rates can be targeted to encourage or discourage the consumption of certain items.
   6. Consumer prices of certain items would fall since labor and tax compliance costs would be cheaper to businesses.
   7.It would allow a greater collection of tax money from those carrying out illegal transactions, since their income is hid from the income tax system but will be taxed when they spend it in a sales tax.
   8. It's a tax system consistent with a free society; i.e. Americans have a choice regarding their taxes, unlike our current confiscation system.




   1. A national sales tax discourages consumption, leading to a conservation of resources. One of the biggest complaints other countries around the world have about the U.S. is that we consume more than 25 percent of the world's resources despite comprising less than 4 percent of the population. Especially when it comes to scarce, non-renewable resources such as oil, few people would argue that we need to cut wasteful consumption. The basic economic law of supply & demand says that as prices go up for an item, demand will go down. Thus, as a society, our national consumption should decrease with a national sales tax.

   2. The removal of an income tax encourages saving and investing, which is the key to job growth. The national savings rate is currently a putrid 4 percent of income. When Americans increase saving & investing, interest rates go down and the economy expands since banks and corporations have more funds to invest in new projects, new stores, new businesses, etc. A national sales tax would encourage increased saving & investing for two reasons: 1) Earnings from investments wouldn't be taxed; thus, the effective rate of return would increase; 2) Americans are never taxed unless they spend money, which they would have to do on much more expensive consumer goods; thus, they have extra incentive to refrain from frivolous spending.

   3. Individuals would have an extra incentive to work hard and earn income, leading to a far more productive nation. Our tax system is completely backwards when you consider the fact that the majority of government revenues come from tax on our earned income. National employment drives the productivity of the country. Since we tax personal incomes, we are actually punishing people for working. What's worse is that we have a "progressive" tax system, meaning rates go up as you make more. This in effect punishes the most successful and the hardest workers. Corporations, which provide the greatest amount of national jobs, are even taxed twice: once at the corporate level plus a second time when earnings are distributed to shareholders. If you take away the income tax, you give every worker in America a raise (except those that don't pay an income tax), which encourages citizens to work more hours. Think about it, if your take-home pay was $20 per hour instead of $14 per hour, would you be willing to work more hours?

   4. A sales tax would be a much simpler system, eliminating the need for individuals to comply with complex tax reporting requirements and freeing up all the money & time lost on the income tax process. Hundreds of billions of dollars are spent every year and billions of hours wasted complying with the incredibly complex American income tax system. Replacing the income tax with a national sales tax would free up all the resources necessary to fulfill those tax requirements. Only businesses that sell goods would be required to file federal tax returns, and the system would be much simpler since they would only have to multiply each sale by the specified rate. As a nation, we would no longer have to waste time & money figuring out depreciation recapture, itemized deduction phase-outs, alternative minimum taxes, charitable deduction caps, and so on. Think about how happy the environmentalists will be when they hear about all the trees that will be saved from the elimination of all those tax forms & schedules!

   5. Tax rates can be targeted to encourage or discourage the consumption of certain items. A national sales tax doesn't mean one standard rate for every consumer good sold in the country. We can customize the rates to help the poor provide for basic necessities as well as discourage or encourage the consumption of certain items. For example, food and lower-priced clothing could be tax-free. Gasoline, cigarettes, fast food, alcohol, and fuel-guzzling automobiles could face steep tax rates. Hydrogen & electric-powered cars, equipment used in a business, and home improvement material could be given minimal tax rates. Get the picture? Once again, the economic law of supply & demand will increase/decrease consumption of particular items.

   6. Consumer prices of certain items would fall since labor and tax compliance costs would be cheaper to businesses. Every cent that goes into producing a product or service is reflected in it's price. For example, if a law firm pays a clerk $25 per hour to service a client, it must charge the client at least that much to avoid losing money. Any business will usually add a certain markup to ensure an adequate profit for the effort and risk. Thus, if you cut the underlying cost, you cut the final price charged to consumers. Elimination of the income tax means a reduction in payroll taxes for businesses as well as the elimination of the need for much of the human resource & payroll departments. Consequently, the cost of offering related products & services drops.

   7. It would allow a greater collection of tax money from those carrying out illegal transactions, since their income is hid from the income tax system but will be taxed when they spend it in a sales tax. Drug dealers, prostitutes, black market dealers, and bookies are examples of people who earn income illegally. Since these and others engaging in illegal transactions obviously don't want the government to know about their activities, the income generated won't be reported on income tax returns. Thus, none of that money is subject to tax. However, with a sales tax, it doesn't matter how money is earned, since the tax is collected immediately by the seller.

   8. It's a tax system consistent with a free society; i.e. Americans have a choice regarding their taxes, unlike our current confiscation system. Our Founding Fathers went to war with England in large part to get away from a stifling tax system like that which we currently face. The U.S.A. is supposed to be a free country with little government interference. However, in our current tax system, we must pay a significant portion of our earnings regardless if we use government services or not. Since our income is taxed and we all have to generate earnings to survive, we don't have a choice. If we institute a national sales tax, the amount of tax we pay is completely up to the individual. We aren't taxed a penny until we go out and spend. Thus, a national sales tax is consistent with the very idea and foundation of America.

This stuff is making my eyes roll back in my head, but I have to say it really does sound like a good idea to me. 

I can't comment on all of the points raised in this thread, but regarding enforcement, I don't really see a huge problem, because businesses already collect sales taxes in most states.  Wouldn’t take much to have them collect a federal sales tax as well.   

The whole idea here is to allow us to keep more of our own money.  We should all be in favor of that concept. 

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #67 on: December 29, 2007, 10:29:45 AM »
Want to take a poll on GetBig ? and see who got spanked ?

That I would like.

  First of all used items, including houses, will not be taxed. Secondly the 30% exclusive tax rate (tax applied external to the actual price of the item) under The Fair Tax you refer to is the 23% inclusive tax rate included in the price of every item bought today. Consequently the dollar amount collected from the inclusive tax rate will become the 30% exclusive rate on an item with the Fair tax. Example: $100 item today includes 23% or $23 in hidden taxes. The actual cost is $77. That will be the price listed on the bill with The Fair Tax. The $23 in tax will be collected on that $77 for a rate of 30%(23/77). The bottom line is the dollar amount collected will be the same as it is with the inclusive tax rate collected on items today.
This paragraph that you cutnpasted makes no sense.

The merchants are supposed to make up the difference for the Fair Tax Scam by absorbing the cost of the truer 30% rate? 

That’s not how econometricians calculate the effects of inclusive sales taxes.

Then you steal someone else’s work to provide an irrelevant comparison between inclusive income taxation and inclusive sales taxation.  Comparing an income tax with a sales tax is apples and oranges.  Just b/c your source claims the comparison is apt, does not make it so.  Either the Fair Tax Scam is inclusive resulting in a tax rate that does not show the true costs of the tax or it is not.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Then I mention the ridiculous assumptions that this Fair Tax Scam (40+% sales tax rate) is based upon and here’s how you respond:

Decker is a Tax Lawyer, who makes a living out of people having a problem with the current tax code,  Do any of you on GetBig really think he would be for a new Fair Tax system, that would do away with  individuals and businesses having to file taxes, and needing his services ?
I think even the dumbest of the dumb can figure this one out, the answer is HELL NO ! ! !


Way to avoid the topic at hand.  Sort of like when you confused the payroll tax with the income tax.  Let’s face it, you don’t know what you are talking about and your cutnpaste nonsense is catching up with you.

Now back to providing you an education free of charge.

Here is one of my sources:  http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/print_unspinning_the_fairtax.html

I suggest you read it b/c you show an intolerable inability to comprehend anything I seem to say.  It is a fairly comprehensive explanation of why the Fair Tax is really built on deception and cooked numbers.  It analyzes the H.R. 25 Natl. Sales Tax legislation which Ron Paul apparently co-opted for his presidential bid.

Assumptions:

*The Fair Tax scammers assume that there will be no tax evasion with the Fair Tax scam.  Zero.  None.  As long as there have been taxes, there has been evasion/avoidance.  Fantasy land.

*The Fair Tax scammers assume that the Fed. Gov. will reduce spending by HALF A TRILLION DOLLARS A YEAR annually.  Fantasy land.

*The Fair Tax scammers, in calculating federal revenue, assumed a 30% inclusive rate for Governmental Purchases.  But in calculating the Federal Expenditures, the scammers EXCLUDED the 30% sales tax cost.  That increases the Gov.’s tax intake and reduces the Gov.’s tax liability.  What a scam!  William Gale, director of the economic studies program at the Brookings Institute, calculates that a 39.3 percent exclusive rate would be necessary for revenue neutrality.  Criminal Fantasy Land

Conclusion:  The Fair Tax works in fantasy land.


At some point, I will address the scams of prebate checks and show how the middle class will bear the brunt of paying taxes while the rich will receive a healthy tax cut. 

We’ll also look at how the US Treasury Department analyzed the merits of the Fair Tax Scam and concluded that it is indeed nonsense. 

Conclusion:

We stand behind our earlier analysis of the FairTax. The proposal to which Gov. Huckabee referred is not a 23 percent tax, but rather a 30 percent tax. And it is revenue-neutral only through an accounting trick. It will collect more money from those earning between $15,000 and $200,000 per year and less from those earning more than $200,000 per year. It is possible that the FairTax would make most people better off, but much of that gain would be a direct result of making the tax code less fair.
http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/print_unspinning_the_fairtax.html


Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #68 on: December 29, 2007, 10:31:45 AM »
Why would you need write-offs and deductions if there is no income tax? 
I don't know where you are going with this question...I was pointing out a feature of the Fair Tax Scam.

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5780
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #69 on: December 29, 2007, 10:34:31 AM »
This stuff is making my eyes roll back in my head, but I have to say it really does sound like a good idea to me. 

I can't comment on all of the points raised in this thread, but regarding enforcement, I don't really see a huge problem, because businesses already collect sales taxes in most states.  Wouldn’t take much to have them collect a federal sales tax as well.   

The whole idea here is to allow us to keep more of our own money.  We should all be in favor of that concept. 

Of course it looks good to you.  You haven't done any research into the validity of Ozark's conclusions.  Do you really believe that:

The low and lower middle class will live tax free b/c of prebate checks?  Who pays for the prebate checks?

Tax evasion and avoidance will not exist b/c of the FT?

No federal enforcement branch will be needed?  Whose going to write all those checks and track compliance of the merchants?

Gov. will reduce spending a 1/2 trillion dollars a year annually?

If you believe any of that, I have investments in a bridge you might be interested in.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63956
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #70 on: December 29, 2007, 10:50:52 AM »
I don't know where you are going with this question...I was pointing out a feature of the Fair Tax Scam.

I'm not going anywhere.  Just asked you to clarify the following statement you made:  "Kiss off your deductions and write-offs.  They are gone."

I don't do my own taxes and I don't know much about tax law, nor do I want to, but aren't "deductions and write-offs" related to reducing your adjusted gross income, which is hit primarily by income taxes?  If so, then why would we need "deductions and write-offs" if there is no income tax? 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63956
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #71 on: December 29, 2007, 10:55:52 AM »
Of course it looks good to you.  You haven't done any research into the validity of Ozark's conclusions.  Do you really believe that:

The low and lower middle class will live tax free b/c of prebate checks?  Who pays for the prebate checks?

Tax evasion and avoidance will not exist b/c of the FT?

No federal enforcement branch will be needed?  Whose going to write all those checks and track compliance of the merchants?

Gov. will reduce spending a 1/2 trillion dollars a year annually?

If you believe any of that, I have investments in a bridge you might be interested in.

No I haven't done any research.  I'm talking about how the concept makes sense.  Why aren't you in favor of a concept that allows people to keep more of their own money? 

Regarding the other items you mentioned:

What are "prebate checks"?

We will always have people who break the law, including tax cheats.  That shouldn't preclude us from trying to reduce our tax burden. 

Why can't we use the IRS as an enforcement branch? 

If Hillary Clinton is president and we have a liberal Democrat Congress, no I don't believe spending will ever be reduced.   :)



Ozark

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 222
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #72 on: December 29, 2007, 01:28:22 PM »
Quote
No I haven't done any research.  I'm talking about how the concept makes sense.  Why aren't you in favor of a concept that allows people to keep more of their own money? -BeachBum

BeachBum, 

The reason Decker is against this, is people would no longer need the services of bloodsucking tax lawyers, ( which Decker is )

Any simplification of our current system, is bad news for Decker, plain and simple.

Asking Decker's opinion on doing away with our current tax system, is like asking a health Insurance salesman what he thinks about a universal health Insurance plan, the Health Insurance Salesman is of course going to talk shit about, no matter if it is good or bad, all that matters is that it would end his current income stream. And this is why you should take Decker's attack of this, and throw it in the garbage, as he has everything to lose, if the system is fixed, and people no longer have to pay him.

Just think about it, with a Fair Tax, no more filing tax returns, no more individuals being audited, and having to pay high cost tax lawyers.  and this is very bad news for Decker. 

read :

How does the FairTax affect income tax preparers, accountants ?

There are, of course, still some people who are involved in sales tax return preparation and sales tax administration under the FairTax, but many fewer than those involved with the income tax today. Those tax preparers, tax lawyers, and Internal Revenue Service employees, who are typically well educated and well equipped with transferable skills, will have to find other, more productive work. The projected 10.5 percent growth in the economy during the first year of the FairTax will provide plenty of new jobs.  (bad for Decker )

and Decker does not want you to know this :

The heavy compliance costs of the income tax are like an anchor holding back economic growth. We have nothing to show for the $265 billion (greater than the current federal deficit -- $205 billion) that we spend each year measuring, tracking, sheltering, documenting, and filing our annual income. Surely these valuable labor and capital resources can be employed more productively -- for example, in following the money trails left by terrorist, drug, and other criminal enterprises, rather than in tracking every American wage earner. ( very bad for Decker )

 
Decker used a hit piece from factcheck.org, that if full of untruths, just read this:

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

(from the above link )

3a)   The most blatant factual error in Mr. Miller’s article is that the one graph and accompanying text in the article that purports to show that the FairTax would raise taxes on all Americans with incomes between $15,000 and $200,000 was produced by the Treasury Department as part of an analysis of a proposal other than the FairTax and is so labeled.  That the graph does not relate to the FairTax is made even more clear in the text of the Treasury study.  The graph looked at a proposal with a different tax base and that did not repeal the regressive payroll tax.  The FairTax repeals the regressive payroll tax.

3b)   One of the most glaring pieces of evidence of bias in the article was Mr. Miller's assertion that we have misled the public by defining the FairTax rate as 23 percent using the "inclusive" method of calculation. Mr. Miller states that as a result, “many FairTax supporters do not understand that the 23 percent number is tax inclusive.” Notwithstanding our very own explicit notation of "inclusive," he insists that we intend to mislead, even though, as we tried to patiently explain, the coporate tax, individual income tax, capital gains taxes and estate and gift taxes, the flat tax proposal, and every other tax reform proposal introduced uses the exact same method of calculation.

Mr. Miller goes on to concede that 85 percent of those who wrote to FactCheck.org understood the difference between tax-inclusive and exclusive, and then he tellingly spins the remaining 15 percent who misunderstood as evidence that we have misled the public. He ignored our point to him that numerous places on our Web site and in our materials we define the difference between "inclusive" and "exclusive" and he was similarly unmoved by our honest plea that our only alternative for those seeking a comparison to the present system was to express income tax rates in "exclusive" terms which we feel would make us subject to the very charges of misleading the public we are now suffering at Mr. Miller's hands. He also seemed unmoved that, in light of his first stated discomfort, we published again in a most visible manner yet another explanation of the different calculation methods on our Web site.

Doesn’t the fact that 85 percent of the FairTax supporters who contacted FactCheck.org to express their displeasure with the illogical conclusions of the article understood the difference present plain evidence that an overwhelming number of supporters understand the exclusive vs. inclusive rate differences? The only data he uses to justify the statement that most FairTax supporters are unaware of the difference between “inclusive” and “exclusive” taxation nomenclature is the fact that 85 percent of FairTax respondents who made contact with him did understand the difference. How can we or any other reader when presented these facts not conclude that Mr. Miller's logic is either flawed or his conclusions fundamentally disingenuous in presentation?

If in your polling you found the United States Congress had reached an 85 percent approval rating, would you declare that "15 percent of Americans disapprove of Congress?" Certainly not.

4)   Another explicit example of your unfair presentation of the FairTax is your statement that the only way the FairTax Plan becomes revenue neutral is via an “accounting trick.” We spent a considerable amount of time with Mr. Miller on the phone Friday even offering to conference in Dr. Laurence Kotlikoff, a respected economist who has written on this very area in an effort to put Mr. Miller's charges of an "accounting trick” to rest. When he refused this offer, we suggested that he, at the very least, modify his language to more fairly indicate that a difference of opinion on this highly complex subject exists and that Dr. Kotlikoff’s scholarly paper on the subject published in Tax Notes, to date has not been refuted or criticized even by Mr. Miller’s advisor, Mr. Gale, who recently lost a debate at AEI on the subject. We had understood from Mr. Miller that he would, at the very least, use less pejorative language that would indicate a difference of opinion on this subject by experts, but such a change has not been made to the article.

This unfounded accusation of “trickery” on the part of me, my board of directors, my staff, consulting team, independent researchers, and our hundreds of thousands of supporters nationwide is insulting and without merit and would seem to require of any fair editor the wholesale revision of this section, if not deletion.

5)   I was stupefied that Mr. Miller did not bother to take the time to investigate our assertion that the President’s Advisory Panel did not conduct an in-depth study of the FairTax Plan itself, but instead based its findings regarding the benefits of a national retail sales tax on a study of a self-created consumption tax plan. While Mr. Miller briefly mentions the fact that the panel failed to release its methodology, why not take the time to investigate our supportable assertion that the presidential panel never conducted an in-depth analysis of the FairTax Plan itself? In fact, I specifically asked Mr. Miller to request clarification on this point from the Treasury Department and/or from members of the 2005 panel a responsible request that seems to have fallen on deaf ears.

6)   It is also concerning to me that your organization’s first contact with Americans For Fair Taxation/FairTax.org regarding your story was merely the afternoon prior to your hoped-for publication date. Certainly it would have been fairer had we been given a greater opportunity to work through Mr. Miller’s questions on the FairTax days in advance a benefit that was undoubtedly bestowed upon FairTax detractors.   Our sources indicate that some of your “advisors” on this article were contacted about a month ago.

Gentlemen, I have provided you with a concise rebuttal to many of the glaring inaccuracies and biased commentary found in the at-issue article. This type of unfair writing is inexcusable and does great harm to our honest effort. It is for these reasons and more that I must assure you that we will do what is necessary to make these facts known.

Therefore, I must once again reiterate my request that you immediately take down the article in question and/or allow us to post our attached rebuttal on your Web site.  Furthermore, I ask that you immediately schedule a time where we can meet with Mr. Miller and a FactCheck.org editor to discuss our stated concerns.

Should you not meet this request, I will be posting our rebuttal on our Web site and will publicly release our claims after 2:00 p.m. EDT today. My hope is that we can work towards a fair and amicable resolution of this issue without having to move our conversation to the public forum.

and once again : The truth is the reason Decker is against this, is people would no longer need the services of bloodsucking tax lawyers, ( which Decker is )

any simplification of our current system, is bad news for Decker, plain and simple.

Asking Decker's opinion on doing away with our current tax system, is like asking a health Insurance salesman what he thinks about a universal health Insurance plan, the Health Insurance Salesman is of course going to talk shit about, no matter if it is good or bad, all that matters is that it would end his current income stream. And this is why you should take Decker's attack of this, and throw it in the garbage, as he has everything to lose, if the system is fixed, and people no longer have to pay him.

So once again, the question is :  Do any of you on GetBig really think Decker would be for a new Fair Tax system, that would do away with individuals and businesses having to file taxes, and needing his services ?

I think even the dumbest of the dumb can figure this one out, the answer is HELL NO ! ! !

Both Ron Paul and Mike Gravel, (both anti-establishment ) and with no axe to grind, are both for the Fair Tax, and have stated so.

But Decker ( the self centered blood sucking tax lawyer ) wants you to believe him, and not Ron Paul or Mike Gravel.

take your pick.


http://easylink.playstream.com/fairtax/RonPaul-FairTax.wvx






w8tlftr

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5111
  • I ♥ ( o Y o )
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #73 on: December 29, 2007, 11:01:36 PM »
Great idea.

Ron Paul also supports the Fair Tax Act.

Of course the who are pro big government, tax lawyers, and socialist-liberals will be completely against this.

Ron Paul 2008!


Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax
« Reply #74 on: December 29, 2007, 11:22:16 PM »


Fred Thompson             Noncommittal

That about sums up Fred... noncommittal