The "Fair" Tax is a welfare scam

[Thomas L. Knapp]

Note: This article originally appears on my blog. Rather than advertise that blog, I'll just post the whole thing here for comment/discussion -- it's licensed under a Creative Commons attribution license, so feel free to redistribute it as you think appropriate - TLK

Over on one of the Yahoo! Groups I frequent (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/libertarian), a poster wrote (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/message/50960) the following:

There is an old saying that says that the perfect is the enemy of the better. The fair tax while not perfect is clearly much better.

Below, I extend and revise my reply (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/message/50964), which I figure is both detailed and succinct enough to make a good blog post/capsule argument (since I've been alluding to the "Fair" Tax now and again, but haven't actually taken it head on). I've also linked some of my claims to supporting source material:

Only if by "clearly much better" you mean it:

- Results in the theft by government of just as much money as the income tax (the "Fair" Taxers boast that their proposal is "revenue neutral" (http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/smart/faq-main.html#6));

- Results in the same amount of, or perhaps more, redistribution of wealth than the income tax (the "Fair" Taxers boast that their proposal is at least as "progressive" as the income tax (http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/smart/faq-main.html#49));

- Puts every American on the dole (http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/smart/faq-main.html#3) so that they're recipients of monthly government welfare checks which the majority will likely fight tooth and nail to keep coming in perpetuity (the "prebate"); and

- The "Fair" Taxers' arguments about eliminating the IRS (http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/smart/faq-main.html#20) aside, will require a bureaucracy to administer (both to collect and to send out the welfare checks).

The "Fair Tax" is at least as bad as the income tax in every way, and worse in some ways. It's not a tax cut. It's not a tax elimination. It's just a strengthening of the tax system by linking it to a welfare program -- just like Social Security, which has been a "third rail" issue in American politics for half a century precisely because millions of Americans have a vested interest in keeping the checks coming.

It may not be politically possible to get the income tax straight-out eliminated right now, but it is politically possible to get it CUT, which would be a far superior alternative to the "Fair" Tax.

The Boston Tea Party's program (http://bostontea.us/node/6) calls for universal, bottom-up tax cuts as follows:

The Boston Tea Party calls for legislation adopting an annual, regularized increase in the personal exemption to the federal income tax of $1,000 or more, and the additional application of said personal exemption to all FICA/Social Security taxes paid by employees and employers.

Members of Congress (mostly Democrats) routinely propose and vote for increases to the personal exemption (http://knappster.blogspot.com/2005/01/confirmation-of-unexpected.html), so it's politically doable.

Increases to the personal exemption give EVERYONE who pays taxes a tax cut (http://knappster.blogspot.com/2006/05/both-ends-toward-middle.html), from the janitor at the local factory to Bill Gates.

Increases to the personal exemption remove people from the tax rolls and withholding treadmill entirely (every time the exemption goes up, more people's income falls below the taxable amount).

Applying the personal exemption to Social Security payments would address the extreme regressivity of the Social Security system. The poorest people pay proportionately the most in Social Security taxes (since the requirement to pay is capped at a certain income level in, I believe, the $60K range), and they receive the fewest benefits (due to shorter lifespan).

Eliminating the income tax is the best option. Failing that, cutting it is. Replacing it with a tax that doesn't cut taxes, doesn't remedy redistribution problems, doesn't eliminate (or probably even reduce) the associated bureaucratic and administrative costs, and puts every American on government welfare is just a scam if the goal is to reduce or eliminate taxation.

[Damocles]

Remember that the SS Taxes are used in the General Funds... Fricking morons. I hate the way these people have spent our money.

[klaatu]

IMHO ... the only true fair tax is a sales "consumption" Tax .... it collects from all sources and people will be taxed accordingingly. The wealthy get taxed on their Rolex... (% of 2g's), The middle get taxed on their Bulova (200.00) and the budget shoppers get taxed on their Geneva's (20.00). Makes sense to me.
Of course.. there would need to be special rules in place for Real Estate ... and such.. we wouldnt want to be taxing on the total sale of house or business as we would a consumable item.

[uscitizen]

Even if those objects are bought in another country Klaatu ?
wouldn't the ritch just take their business out of the country ?

[Damocles]

Even if those objects are bought in another country Klaatu ?
wouldn't the ritch just take their business out of the country ?
They would have to never use any of those new products within the country, or they'd have to pay the taxes on the value...

It doesn't take much to realize the rich like using the stuff they buy and they like living here too.

[klaatu]

Even if those objects are bought in another country Klaatu ?
wouldn't the ritch just take their business out of the country ?

I was waiting for this response .. lol ... assuming that everything is going to be cheaper out of the country? What prevents them from doing that now?
A sales tax takes all the loopholes out.. you know the loopholes for the rich that you Dems cry about. A sales tax would probably collect more from the rich... isnt that what you want?

For any type of Commerce to succeed you need a level of Consumer Confidence.... assuming that the rich understand this..and they are the likely ones to depend on Consumer confidence to succeed in their own businesses ... they will avoid playing trivial games as to run out of the country to save a few bucks ... actually.. the middle class are more likely to do that.... run to Canada or Mexico if they can save a few bucks.
The rich depend on the working class having a free flow of cash to spend .. this is something that liberals tend to forget.

[uscitizen]

Perhaps not but would the sales tax apply to the coprs that the rich control. simple matter to have your company buy your Hummer for you. happens all the time now for tax avoidance.

[Damocles]

Anything purchased would be part of the consumption tax. Including from Corps...

[klaatu]

There would have to be rules in place to keep from over taxing or double, triple taxing. If an executive of a company is using his Corp. to purchase a personal consumable to avoid paying tax .. he then is breaking the law... same rules apply.

[uscitizen]

Anything purchased would be part of the consumption tax. Including from Corps...

Then I am for the consumption tax if it's tax is at least cut from the regular income tax or does away with the income tax.

[Damocles]

Then I am for the consumption tax if it's tax is at least cut from the regular income tax or does away with the income tax.
I would prefer it do away with income tax. The whole income tax system has become a tool for the Feds to give money away to specific groups...

[uscitizen]

I would prefer it do away with income tax. The whole income tax system has become a tool for the Feds to give money away to specific groups...
Why do you think any funds raised by any tax system would be any different Damo ? Same govt in place, just new tax.

[Damocles]

Why do you think any funds raised by any tax system would be any different Damo ? Same govt in place, just new tax.
Much easier to see whether there is an exemption in place...

And when you file your taxes you get money back... This is the tool they use to give the money away without others realizing it. They are just getting a "return", not a giveaway. Of course many of the 'returns' are to people that never actually payed income taxes. EIC comes to mind, as well as those corporate returns for specific cost outlays...

In a system where everybody pays the consumption tax exemptions would not only be easy to detect but also more difficult in implementation.

[uscitizen]

I go for a zero tax exemption status for all. churches, corps, individual, etc....

[Damocles]

I go for a zero tax exemption status for all. churches, corps, individual, etc....
I agree.

And tax everything but the necessities for a household to survive.

[uscitizen]

I agree.

And tax everything but the necessities for a household to survive.
but what are the necessities ?
I am curerently taxed on my home, I think I sort of need that :)
Medical care ? food yes but what food ? electricity ? Gasoline to get to work ?
Any exception opens the door for all.

[Damocles]

Only things needed for survival. You cannot eat your automobile. Drink your gasoline. One can survive without a job, ask the homeless.

Necessities are what you buy to live.

[uscitizen]

I would die without some of my medicines....I would freeze without a home and heat....

[Care4all]

I would prefer it do away with income tax. The whole income tax system has become a tool for the Feds to give money away to specific groups...
I still don't see how it would be any different, they can still legislate law in other ways to accomodate their friends, like laxing Epa Regulations, absolving the payment of land lease fees in the gulf of mexico worth billions to the tax payer, paying for the pipeline from ANWR to the mainland states for the oil companies, giving credits for building new refineries, rewriting bankruptcy laws in the FAVOR of the bank without requiring them to pass these savings on to the customer, Pill bill legislation where the HMO'S AND PHARMA made out like bandits, especiall pharma not having to negotiate bulk discounts and locking us out of Canada...

I can go on and on and changing the tax system will not prevent any of the above from happening imo...thus, IT AIN'T WORTH IT! imho....

And they can raise the consumption tax rate as easily as the income tax rate...ya know they will do it, over and over again....this won't stop spending at all imo, and SPENDING is where the problem begins, it's the ROOT of the problem....

care

[Damocles]

I would die without some of my medicines....I would freeze without a home and heat....
No, you would not freeze without a home and heat. Ask the homeless...

And Prescribed medication would be included in necessitites. Therefore they would not be taxed. They aren't now either unless you are buying OTC drugs which still would not be excluded...

[Damocles]

I still don't see how it would be any different, they can still legislate law in other ways to accomodate their friends, like laxing Epa Regulations, absolving the payment of land lease fees in the gulf of mexico worth billions to the tax payer, paying for the pipeline from ANWR to the mainland states for the oil companies, giving credits for building new refineries, rewriting bankruptcy laws in the FAVOR of the bank without requiring them to pass these savings on to the customer, Pill bill legislation where the HMO'S AND PHARMA made out like bandits, especiall pharma not having to negotiate bulk discounts and locking us out of Canada...

I can go on and on and changing the tax system will not prevent any of the above from happening imo...thus, IT AIN'T WORTH IT! imho....

And they can raise the consumption tax rate as easily as the income tax rate...ya know they will do it, over and over again....this won't stop spending at all imo, and SPENDING is where the problem begins, it's the ROOT of the problem....

care
You simply deny them the power to do those any longer. The only one they could always do is the one where so long as the Fed Gov't is buying the product FOR people instead of people buying the product for themselves is give the money to their 'friends'...

One way or the other this would be done. So long as the Feds are buying it will continue to happen. Do you really think those toilet seats and wrenches were worth 20,000?

The Government should NOT provide anything directly.

[uscitizen]

hmm, why no homeless in the country only in the cities ?

[Damocles]

Because in order to panhandle effectively you need the highest saturation of people.

[Care4all]

no I don't think they were worth 20k each, but that money was not going to the contractor, that money came back to the usa government and was spent on clandesant CIA projects in South America, Iran, Cuba etc, where they did not want the public to be privvey to their spending in these secretive areas, of security of course! Is my understanding of that situation... :D

[uscitizen]

Could have something to do with the values and attitudes of country folk vs city folks too Damo.

[Damocles]

Could have something to do with the values and attitudes of country folk vs city folks too Damo.
It could, but not likely. Most of those food lines are run by their churches.

[IHateGovernment]

Progressive Consumption Tax Now!!!!

[klaatu]

Lets not forget black market money ... How much Government revenue is lost due to the black market? This would be collected.. because guess what? People who are in the balck market spend money .... how many billions upon billions is this worth?

[uscitizen]

Yep, black market like ebay and flea markets ?

[uscitizen]

would the consumption/sales tax apply everytime something is sold ? ie I buy a TV pay the tax and then sell it used later. would tax again be paid ?

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Gee, the fair tax sounds like what I was proposing - a consumption tax, along with a guaranteed minimum income to make the tax progressive. A guranateed minimum income has been an idea around for the past 200 years - Tom Paine was one of the first to propose it.

You guys are whining at nothing. Of course the tax is revenue neautral. It can be reduced later on if you cut government, but proposing any tax that brings in less money than you currently need clearly isn't going to work.

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I still don't see how it would be any different, they can still legislate law in other ways to accomodate their friends, like laxing Epa Regulations, absolving the payment of land lease fees in the gulf of mexico worth billions to the tax payer, paying for the pipeline from ANWR to the mainland states for the oil companies, giving credits for building new refineries, rewriting bankruptcy laws in the FAVOR of the bank without requiring them to pass these savings on to the customer, Pill bill legislation where the HMO'S AND PHARMA made out like bandits, especiall pharma not having to negotiate bulk discounts and locking us out of Canada...

I can go on and on and changing the tax system will not prevent any of the above from happening imo...thus, IT AIN'T WORTH IT! imho....

And they can raise the consumption tax rate as easily as the income tax rate...ya know they will do it, over and over again....this won't stop spending at all imo, and SPENDING is where the problem begins, it's the ROOT of the problem....

care

A consumption tax seems to be more apparent than an income tax, and would probably make people look at what they're spending more.

For instance, I simply ignore what they take away in taxes whenever I get my check, and never even get to see it, but whenever you actually witness an extra 25% of the money you've gotten being pumped into uncle sam you might start seeing government spending in a whole new light.

A consumption tax is also different in the way it taxes savings, however...

[FUCK THE POLICE]

would the consumption/sales tax apply everytime something is sold ? ie I buy a TV pay the tax and then sell it used later. would tax again be paid ?

Probably.

But in the same way, you get taxed on your income whenever you get your check, and whenever you spend the money, and it becomes someone elses income, it is again taxed. Taxation is practically impossible without double taxation unless you are talking about some sort of property tax (and it could be argued that re-taxing the value of the property over and over again every year is double taxation, also).

[uscitizen]

Would a consumption tax tax savings ? I thought it was just when you purchased a product ?

[Care4all]

i think it should be a progressive income tax, without any deductions other than the deduction per person.

then lower the flat rates for income brackets, to something like this:

0 - $45k 5%
45- $90k 10%
90- $180k 15%
180-$360k 20%
360-$$$$k 25%
--------------------------

[uscitizen]

why deductions for persons Care ?

[klaatu]

Yep, black market like ebay and flea markets ?

I was thinkng more in the lines of gambling, Drugs, Prostitution and black market merchandise ... all are billion dollar illegl enterpises. This revenue is lost with the current system in place.

[klaatu]

i think it should be a progressive income tax, without any deductions other than the deduction per person.

then lower the flat rates for income brackets, to something like this:

0 - $45k 5%
45- $90k 10%
90- $180k 15%
180-$360k 20%
360-$$$$k 25%
--------------------------

So the person who makes 88,000 a year will end up with more than the person who makes 90,500 .. how is this fair? Why do you insist on penalizing those who monetarily advance in life?

[uscitizen]

why shoudl I help support someone who has a lot of kids by them paying less taxes ?

Klaatu, how would any tax scheme as long as we have untraceable cash help with the blackmarket tax avoidance ?

[Care4all]

why deductions for persons Care ?

because SS tax would still be separate, and the working class up to 100k or so would be contributing 13% total of their income, (6.5% empl/6.5% company, but it is still counted as an emplyee expense).

while those above 100k would not be paying this tax on their total income, and in the meantime our government is spending and has been spending every dime of the surplus revenues from SS on our general expenditures, our expenses that income tax should be paying for....

we need to somehow credit the income workers that pay for this...so that they do not end up paying more in taxes than the higher income earners, who don't pay it for the most part of their income.

or we need to incorporate SS benefits/taxes, totally in to the income tax structure....imo

[uscitizen]

Just do away with the seperate SS stuff and roll them in together with taxes. Heck the govt spends them that way now.
I was thinking on the child deductions. My view is if you can't afford em don't have em.

[klaatu]

why shoudl I help support someone who has a lot of kids by them paying less taxes ?

Klaatu, how would any tax scheme as long as we have untraceable cash help with the blackmarket tax avoidance ?

Because a Sales Tax collects from money that is spent .. people who earn through the black market spend their money.. correct? So the Government wins. But in the current system they do not report their eanings.. thus .. the Government loses.


As for your first question .. under a Consumption Tax.. you wouldnt.

[uscitizen]

Because a Sales Tax collects from money that is spent .. people who earn through the black market spend their money.. correct? So the Government wins. But in the current system they do not report their eanings.. thus .. the Government loses.


As for your first question .. under a Consumption Tax.. you wouldnt.
UMM I know people who earm money at a job and spend it on gambling and or drugs......

[klaatu]

UMM I know people who earm money at a job and spend it on gambling and or drugs......

USC.. the point of interest here is the person or persons they are purchasing the drugs from ... these are the people that do not report their earnings.. because it is illegal.... But these people do consume with the illegal money they earn .. they buy goods and merchandise... under a Sales Tax system..this lost revenue is now captured ... Gabeesh?

[uscitizen]

Yep, but still missing a step, and the druggies and gamblers will pay less taxes than I will. all this will be harder to do when cash is abolished and all financial transactions will be traceable. Not something I want, but will happen in the next 20-40 yrs or so.

[Care4all]

i don't agree with a consumption tax...

the average american is saving nothing today, that means they are spending all of their money thus all would be taxed, in general....

but the wealthiest out there do not spend all of their money, they save a great deal of it....

in addition to this, a high sales tax will hurt sales of retail goods from foreigners...there is a huge trade right now of foreigners coming here just to shop and get our cheaper goods....especially clothes and shoes...at least i am personally knowledgable about those areas...

and the federal government taxing food and escentials like clothes just seems wrong, especially when it may be on top of what they are paying in local and state sales taxes

[Care4all]

and what happens to 401 k's, ira's inplace already, what encourages saving?

what encourages investing in municiple bonds that were tax free? where will municipalities get their money from for special projects?

[FUCK THE POLICE]

It prevents people from cheating taxes because they didn't report their income.

It does leave open the possiblity that people will cheat their taxes by not reporting what they have sold, however.

There's no way to get rid of the black market's avoidance of taxes.

[FUCK THE POLICE]

i don't agree with a consumption tax...

the average american is saving nothing today, that means they are spending all of their money thus all would be taxed, in general....

but the wealthiest out there do not spend all of their money, they save a great deal of it....

in addition to this, a high sales tax will hurt sales of retail goods from foreigners...there is a huge trade right now of foreigners coming here just to shop and get our cheaper goods....especially clothes and shoes...at least i am personally knowledgable about those areas...

and the federal government taxing food and escentials like clothes just seems wrong, especially when it may be on top of what they are paying in local and state sales taxes

The income tax basically mandates that you can't people pay a tax on clothes and food. You could only get rid of that with a complicated rebate system. It is very easy, however, to do away with that with a sales tax - just label them goods not taxed.

A foreigner who's already here isn't going to pack and go back to home because of high sales taxes. It would prevent them from going here simply for a shopping spree, but few people actually do that. Since most European countries have consumption tax systems up anyway it shouldn't make a big difference. It's actually one of the advantages of the system - people passing by pump money into the economy rather than only those who live in the country.

Although the wealthy generally save more, I don't believe it's very practicable to discourage all savings simply because the wealthy already do it. The wealthy will continue to save at the rate they are right now, it will only be the poor who will start to save as they realize the benefits of doing so. Savings itself is mostly good for the economy, even if the rich only did it.

[FUCK THE POLICE]

and what happens to 401 k's, ira's inplace already, what encourages saving?

what encourages investing in municiple bonds that were tax free? where will municipalities get their money from for special projects?

I think it's petty to discredit an entire system because of something that minor municipalities do, especially whenever their revenue could be replaced by other means.

The 40lK's and IRA's will no longer be necessary, since there's nothing to discourage savings anymore and things that were created to shelter savings from taxes will be unnecessary because EVERY saving is now sheltered from taxes.

[Care4all]

I think it's petty to discredit an entire system because of something that minor municipalities do, especially whenever their revenue could be replaced by other means.

The 40lK's and IRA's will no longer be necessary, since there's nothing to discourage savings anymore and things that were created to shelter savings from taxes will be unnecessary because EVERY saving is now sheltered from taxes.

Did I only list one reason why I discredited it watermark? gees louise!

What do you do with all the iras and 401k's that have not had any taxes taken out of them when you change to this system? make them pay the tax at the time of the change? allow them to keep their 401k's iras until they die and not make them pay the income tax they were suppose to pay back when they put the money in there?

And how would you transition in to this..? one year every one pays their income taxes and then the next year starting january 1 you add the tax to goods and eliminate the tax on income?If that is the case then the Iras and 401ks before this conversion should be taxed....

and money you collected on December 31 was taxed via income tax and then when you go to spend it, it is taxed again.... I just can't figure out how the transition would work.

And how would the stock market work? When you buy stock would that be taxed too?

and if you eliminated 401k's what kind of retirement benefit is the employer going to give/negotiate with their employees now?

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I'm sure there's a way to do it fairly. I'd just have to know more about the system.

[Immanuel]

What do you do with all the iras and 401k's that have not had any taxes taken out of them when you change to this system? make them pay the tax at the time of the change? allow them to keep their 401k's iras until they die and not make them pay the income tax they were suppose to pay back when they put the money in there?

I don't remember the full details but this has been addressed in the bill. Something like there will be a consumer credit for the balance each person has in their 401(k)'s, IRAs etc. Again, I don't remember all the details, but if you actually read any information on the bill you would have known that.

Immie

[Immanuel]

I'm sure there's a way to do it fairly. I'd just have to know more about the system.

Care is not interested in doing it fairly. She prefers allowing the politicians and the lobbyists to build huge loopholes for large contributors into the income tax system so that they can dominate the world.

Immie

PS just ribbing you Care ;)

[klaatu]

i don't agree with a consumption tax...

the average american is saving nothing today, that means they are spending all of their money thus all would be taxed, in general....

but the wealthiest out there do not spend all of their money, they save a great deal of it....

in addition to this, a high sales tax will hurt sales of retail goods from foreigners...there is a huge trade right now of foreigners coming here just to shop and get our cheaper goods....especially clothes and shoes...at least i am personally knowledgable about those areas...

and the federal government taxing food and escentials like clothes just seems wrong, especially when it may be on top of what they are paying in local and state sales taxes


Why is it wrong to tax food and clothes if you are not paying any income Tax? It seems as your main objective is to have the wealthiest pay for everything? If it is the poorest amongst us that worries you, I would be for a system that would exempt them from paying tax on certain items... like food and medicne... and I would be for a system that would allow places like the Salvation Army or Goodwill to become Tax Free Zones. Fair enough?

[uscitizen]

If the consumption tax treplaces the income tax. and there are exemptions on basic living costs, then I have no problem with it.

[Damocles]

and I would be for a system that would allow places like the Salvation Army or Goodwill to become Tax Free Zones. Fair enough?

LOL. I was just about to say this...

I mean really, do you think the $20,000 that Julia Roberts spent on her bra shouldn't be taxed?

[uscitizen]

However in a consumer confidence slowdown, the govt might go broke err well more broke, since people would be saving as opposed to spending.

[Damocles]

Same could be said here... It's why you don't exclude the necessities except in extreme need.

The government is expected in times of need to have a deficit even now. People lose their jobs the government gets less money, it's the way it works.

[klaatu]

Same could be said here... It's why you don't exclude the necessities except in extreme need.

The government is expected in times of need to have a deficit even now. People lose their jobs the government gets less money, it's the way it works.

Exactly! When you put it that way it sounds ridiculous doesnt it? This is what people dont seem to get.. these people spend enormous amounts of money on the most ridiculous things.. but it does keep our economy rolling and the windfall to the Government in the form of a consumption tax would be huge.
The Rich in this Country would be doing exatly what some people want... aka ...paying their fair share.

i.e. .... a tax on a 20,000 dog house ...

[Immanuel]

Exactly! When you put it that way it sounds ridiculous doesnt it? This is what people dont seem to get.. these people spend enormous amounts of money on the most ridiculous things.. but it does keep our economy rolling and the windfall to the Government in the form of a consumption tax would be huge.
The Rich in this Country would be doing exatly what some people want... aka ...paying their fair share.

i.e. .... a tax on a 20,000 dog house ...

The problem is that they don't care whether or not the rich pay their fair share, what they want (they being those in power who oppose the consumption/fair tax and they are not all liberals) is to continue to control the country by controlling the tax loopholes. Lobbyists have a hell of a lot of power and would lose a significant amount of that power if the fair tax were passed. Lobbyist get politicians elected and those politicians ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE UP the power they control with their dangling tax loopholes.

Immie

[klaatu]

The problem is that they don't care whether or not the rich pay their fair share, what they want (they being those in power who oppose the consumption/fair tax and they are not all liberals) is to continue to control the country by controlling the tax loopholes. Lobbyists have a hell of a lot of power and would lose a significant amount of that power if the fair tax were passed. Lobbyist get politicians elected and those politicians ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE UP the power they control with their dangling tax loopholes.

Immie


A Sales Tax seems to work pretty good down here in Florida ..doesnt it Immie? Aside from the money dished out for Hurricane repair ... this states revenues keep rolling in .....

[Immanuel]

A Sales Tax seems to work pretty good down here in Florida ..doesnt it Immie? Aside from the money dished out for Hurricane repair ... this states revenues keep rolling in .....

Yes, it works quite well. You will also note that it seems to work very well for most states and counties. Don't most states (if not all) have a sales tax system set up; even the ones that also use income taxes? That is because the sales tax works. The one thing it eliminates is political power control.

We don't want to limit politicians power do we?

Immie

[Care4all]

Exactly! When you put it that way it sounds ridiculous doesnt it? This is what people dont seem to get.. these people spend enormous amounts of money on the most ridiculous things.. but it does keep our economy rolling and the windfall to the Government in the form of a consumption tax would be huge.
The Rich in this Country would be doing exatly what some people want... aka ...paying their fair share.

i.e. .... a tax on a 20,000 dog house ...

If the wealthiest SPENT EVERY DIME OF THEIR MONEY ON PURCHASES....then it would be fair, to those at the bottom that saves nothing and spends all of their money on purchseses to survive.

Will the wealthiest spend every dime they make and will it be taxed?

ONLY THEN would it truely be a fair tax....to those at the bottom....(in percentage of tax paid out of income.)

If the wealthy consume with only 50% of their money and save the rest, and the average family spends 90% of their money on consumables and saves the remaining 10%....

THEN YOU ARE TAXING those that make less at a higher percentage than those at the top.

How do you overcome that?

What is FAIR about that?

And how do you stop the rich from buying overseas and bringing it in to this country with no taxes paid on it?

(Jeb bush's wife was caught by customs smuggling about 100k worth of goods on an airplane from her overseas trip, I can remember reading.... my girlfriend bought a 20k rolex for her husband when in the EU on business, what would stop her from doing that in the future?)

[Immanuel]

And how do you stop the rich from buying overseas and bringing it in to this country with no taxes paid on it?

(Jeb bush's wife was caught by customs smuggling about 100k worth of goods on an airplane from her overseas trip, I can remember reading.... my girlfriend bought a 20k rolex for her husband when in the EU on business, what would stop her from doing that in the future?)

It happens and you punish them with fines and jail time when you catch them.

I realize you think that under the income tax system no one cheats on their taxes.

Immie

[Care4all]

Yes, it works quite well. You will also note that it seems to work very well for most states and counties. Don't most states (if not all) have a sales tax system set up; even the ones that also use income taxes? That is because the sales tax works. The one thing it eliminates is political power control.

We don't want to limit politicians power do we?

Immie

How does it LIMIT their power immie? I'd love to hear this from your mouth...

cuz here is what I KNOW!

I still don't see how it would be any different, they can still legislate law in other ways to accomodate their friends, like laxing Epa Regulations, absolving the payment of land lease fees in the gulf of mexico worth billions to the tax payer, paying for the pipeline from ANWR to the mainland states for the oil companies, giving credits for building new refineries, rewriting bankruptcy laws in the FAVOR of the bank without requiring them to pass these savings on to the customer, Pill bill legislation where the HMO'S AND PHARMA made out like bandits, especiall pharma not having to negotiate bulk discounts and locking us out of Canada...

I can go on and on and changing the tax system will not prevent any of the above from happening imo...thus, IT AIN'T WORTH IT!

[Immanuel]

Care,

Under the Fair Tax system a family of 4 receives somewhere in the neighborhood of $450/month to eliminate the taxes they would normally spend on necessities each month. A frugal family of 4 in need could very well have a negative tax of what maybe $200 - $300/month to help? Maybe they can save that money for a car or use it to help pay rent?

Immie

[Damocles]

A consumption tax can limit the power of the government by simply making it unnecessary for them to know exactly how much you make, where you go and what you win when you get there... It would make the government less intrusive.

[Immanuel]

How does it LIMIT their power immie? I'd love to hear this from your mouth...

cuz here is what I KNOW!

I still don't see how it would be any different, they can still legislate law in other ways to accomodate their friends, like laxing Epa Regulations, absolving the payment of land lease fees in the gulf of mexico worth billions to the tax payer, paying for the pipeline from ANWR to the mainland states for the oil companies, giving credits for building new refineries, rewriting bankruptcy laws in the FAVOR of the bank without requiring them to pass these savings on to the customer, Pill bill legislation where the HMO'S AND PHARMA made out like bandits, especiall pharma not having to negotiate bulk discounts and locking us out of Canada...

I can go on and on and changing the tax system will not prevent any of the above from happening imo...thus, IT AIN'T WORTH IT!

Who did you get that quote from?

John Kerry?

Trust him all you want.

Immie

[Immanuel]

Care,

Take away the billions if not hundreds of billions of tax savings these guys wield and tell me that does not limit their power.

Immie

[Care4all]

So the person who makes 88,000 a year will end up with more than the person who makes 90,500 .. how is this fair? Why do you insist on penalizing those who monetarily advance in life?

88k

45k x 5% = $2250
43k x 10%=$4300
total tax= $6550

NET INCOME= $81,450
-------------------------------------------------

90.5K

45k x 5% = $2250
45k x 10% =$4500
0.5k x 15%=$ 75
total tax= $6825

NET INCOME=$83,675.

there IS NO PUNISHMENT FOR MAKING MORE...

where do you get such crap from...the right wing bullshit gallery?

do the math or review the matH klaatu...you can see what you are saying is nothing less than a FALLACY.

CARE

[Immanuel]

Also, Care, no one ever said it would eliminate the power they control, simply reduce it.

You as a socialist don't want to reduce it. You want to increase it for your own goals.

Immie

[uscitizen]

A consumption tax can limit the power of the government by simply making it unnecessary for them to know exactly how much you make, where you go and what you win when you get there... It would make the government less intrusive.

what you win ? You mean placing a bet in the casino is not a purchase to be taxed ? You purchase chips and in essence buy a bet.

Also I believe the intrusiveness into our lives by the gummit is inevitable and will only grow. You forget about the war on drugs and terror, etc.

[Damocles]

Your purchase should be taxed, your winnings not. At least not until you spend them. Knowing what you win is unnecessary. The government has no need to get into your personal bank account.

[Topspin]

How many of you tax the shit out of the rich socialist make more than 80,000 a year. Are you false outrage liberals or just out right socialist.
I never hear from someone paying more than 35,000 in taxes that they aren't paying enough. LOFL

thanks I recommend last comic standing for you false outrage socialist

[Care4all]

Who did you get that quote from?

John Kerry?

Trust him all you want.

Immie

It was my POST that YOU neglected to read and ignored earlier in the thread, probably so you could PRETEND that you are still right about YOUR silly assertions that this new tax method will curb congress....

it won't, it is not the answer to anything that is going on right now...
congress will still have the same amount of money to spend and can still give their big gun contributors everything they want....imho.

plus they can raise the sales tax whenever they please, and even EASIER THAN raising income tax rates.....?

Spending is the problem, wasteful spending, and spending alone...by congress will continue under whatever new tax structure we proclaim will save us from it....its smoke and mirrors at this point....

we need restrictions on spending such as paygo, to stop the spending like there is no tomorrow.

care

[Damocles]

It was my POST that YOU neglected to read and ignored earlier in the thread, probably so you could PRETEND that you are still right about YOUR silly assertions that this new tax method will curb congress....

it won't, it is not the answer to anything that is going on right now...
congress will still have the same amount of money to spend and can still give their big gun contributors everything they want....imho.

plus they can raise the sales tax whenever they please, and even EASIER THAN raising income tax rates.....?

Spending is the problem, wasteful spending, and spending alone...by congress will continue under whatever new tax structure we proclaim will save us from it....its smoke and mirrors at this point....

we need restrictions on spending such as paygo, to stop the spending like there is no tomorrow.

care
We need both.

[uscitizen]

Yes how would a fair tax keep the gummit from giving away oil royalties, timber, etc to corps ? What would happen to corporate income taxes under this fair tax scheme ?

[Immanuel]

Your purchase should be taxed, your winnings not. At least not until you spend them. Knowing what you win is unnecessary. The government has no need to get into your personal bank account.

And when you spend those winnings they will be taxed as they should be.

Immie

[Care4all]

Care,

Take away the billions if not hundreds of billions of tax savings these guys wield and tell me that does not limit their power.

Immie
I don't understand what you mean immie? Please explain...
care

[Immanuel]

It was my POST that YOU neglected to read and ignored earlier in the thread, probably so you could PRETEND that you are still right about YOUR silly assertions that this new tax method will curb congress....

it won't, it is not the answer to anything that is going on right now...
congress will still have the same amount of money to spend and can still give their big gun contributors everything they want....imho.

plus they can raise the sales tax whenever they please, and even EASIER THAN raising income tax rates.....?

Spending is the problem, wasteful spending, and spending alone...by congress will continue under whatever new tax structure we proclaim will save us from it....its smoke and mirrors at this point....

we need restrictions on spending such as paygo, to stop the spending like there is no tomorrow.

care

You are a fool Care who only wants to continue her death grip on America.

I did not ignore your post and I still do not believe it came from your fingertips. I did not go back and read every single post. I simply did not see it. Yet you ignore my post. Why would you not want a poor family to have a possible $200 - 300/month negative tax?

Immie

[uscitizen]

They seem to have that now with EIC Immie.

[Care4all]

They seem to have that now with EIC Immie.

precisely uscit!


these guys can only barrage me with PERSONAL INSULTS to defend their plan of tax perfectness...

they don't debate the issue just continue to call names...hmmm...must make them feel BIGGER than they really are I guess?

I have tried to debate this issue, but they are not willing to debate it...guess that means it must be a VERY WEAK PLAN, don't ya think?

care ;)

[uscitizen]

Immie what about corporate income tax under the fair tax plan ?

[Immanuel]

I don't understand what you mean immie? Please explain...
care

It is simple. Lobbyists come to our politicians regarding a bill that is going through Congress. Let's say it is a bill regarding an environmental issue that is going to cost IBM hundreds of millions of dollars. IBM hires a lobbyist to convince Congress to drop the bill. Well, that is simply not expedient for Congress, but a Congressman comes up with an amendment to give IBM a special credit or exemption from this rather costly bill. It passes with the amendment and both IBM and the Congressman whose next re-election campaign will be assisted by IBM are very happy. Happens all the time.

Of course, removing that advantage from Congress would reduce the power that they wield. Congressmen and their hacks (like you) are very much against this regardless of how much it could help the poor and needy.

Immie

[Immanuel]

Immie what about corporate income tax under the fair tax plan ?

Corporations pay the same taxes as any other consumer.

Immie

[Immanuel]

They seem to have that now with EIC Immie.

Not to the same extent.

Immie

[Immanuel]

precisely uscit!


these guys can only barrage me with PERSONAL INSULTS to defend their plan of tax perfectness...

they don't debate the issue just continue to call names...hmmm...must make them feel BIGGER than they really are I guess?

I have tried to debate this issue, but they are not willing to debate it...guess that means it must be a VERY WEAK PLAN, don't ya think?

care ;)

Listen here witch. You are the one that attacks not me.

You haven't even read the plan. You won't even look at what this can do for to poor. You read the liberal talking points and follow them hook line and sinker. Until you read the plan get the fuck off the thread.

Immie

[Immanuel]

I guess what you want is to leave the status quo. It works for tax cheats and politicans so we should not even look at something that just might be a little better for everyone.

Immie

[Care4all]

Listen here witch. You are the one that attacks not me.

You haven't even read the plan. You won't even look at what this can do for to poor. You read the liberal talking points and follow them hook line and sinker. Until you read the plan get the fuck off the thread.

Immie

here we go again....sticks and stones may break my bones but names will NEVER hurt me...

continue.... I'll be waiting....mr, oh so nice and pure...

just an fyi:

every word I posted was my own regarding this...I have expressed my concerns and have continued to ask questions on how things would work...

for you to take my actual words and accuse me of plagerizing is pretty LOW, but hey, you are a "righty" and they can sliver in the slime with the best of them...as shown by you....

There! ya happy? I got a personal cut in there ...JUST FOR YOU! :D

why don't you stick to debate and expound on your knowledge of this subject instead of making up LIES about your opponent and slinging all kinds of made up accusations of what they are thinking?


you owe me an apology....but I won't wait, because an apology is above you.:(

care

[Care4all]

I guess what you want is to leave the status quo. It works for tax cheats and politicans so we should not even look at something that just might be a little better for everyone.

Immie

I have already expounded on what I thought would be good...READ THE THREAD.... it was not status quo, as you put it...

[Immanuel]

here we go again....sticks and stones may break my bones but names will NEVER hurt me...

continue.... I'll be waiting....mr, oh so nice and pure...

just an fyi:

every word I posted was my own regarding this...I have expressed my concerns and have continued to ask questions on how things would work...

for you to take my actual words and accuse me of plagerizing is pretty LOW, but hey, you are a "righty" and they can sliver in the slime with the best of them...as shown by you....

There! ya happy? I got a personal cut in there ...JUST FOR YOU! :D

why don't you stick to debate and expound on your knowledge of this subject instead of making up LIES about your opponent and slinging all kinds of made up accusations of what they are thinking?


you owe me an apology....but I won't wait, because an apology is above you.:(

care

Shove your apology.

I have apologized to you thousands of times and never once received the same kind of treatment.

Immie

[Immanuel]

I have already expounded on what I thought would be good...READ THE THREAD.... it was not status quo, as you put it...

It is shit just like every other idea you have.

A progressive tax is just more of the same shit we have now and will only translate to more "loopholes" for those who can buy the power. Which is what you want.

Immie

[Care4all]

It is simple. Lobbyists come to our politicians regarding a bill that is going through Congress. Let's say it is a bill regarding an environmental issue that is going to cost IBM hundreds of millions of dollars. IBM hires a lobbyist to convince Congress to drop the bill. Well, that is simply not expedient for Congress, but a Congressman comes up with an amendment to give IBM a special credit or exemption from this rather costly bill. It passes with the amendment and both IBM and the Congressman whose next re-election campaign will be assisted by IBM are very happy. Happens all the time.

Of course, removing that advantage from Congress would reduce the power that they wield. Congressmen and their hacks (like you) are very much against this regardless of how much it could help the poor and needy.

Immie

Huh? How does a consumption tax PREVENT YOUR SCENARIO FROM HAPPENING? It does not stop this from happening, no matter how taxes are collected???????

[Care4all]

It is shit just like every other idea you have.

ImmieSee? this is exactly what I mean...you slew insults without backing anything up, without debating ANYTHING!

sooooooooooooo

What is SHIT about my proposal, what is there about it that is SHIT?

[Immanuel]

Huh? How does a consumption tax PREVENT YOUR SCENARIO FROM HAPPENING? It does not stop this from happening, no matter how taxes are collected???????

Earth to Care, Earth to Care. Try turning your brain on.

There won't be any tax credits and there won't be any tax loopholes.

And onces again, no one said it would eliminate all power and influence just reduce it some.

Immie

[Immanuel]

See? this is exactly what I mean...you slew insults without backing anything up, without debating ANYTHING!

sooooooooooooo

What is SHIT about my proposal, what is there about it that is SHIT?

In my frustration I hit enter before finishing the post. See the edit which was completed before this post.

I understand that you probably missed the edit while you were keying this in.

Immie

[Care4all]

Earth to Care, Earth to Care. Try turning your brain on.

There won't be any tax credits and there won't be any tax loopholes.

And onces again, no one said it would eliminate all power and influence just reduce it some.

Immie

pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, they just label it something else immie, something with a real pretty name, like "clear skys initiative" or "healthy forrest plan"...it may not be labeled a tax credit, but IT WILL BE A CREDIT of some sort NONE THE LESS!

how does a CONSUMPTION tax prevent congress from giving an incentive? It doesn't immie? Why would you think it would? Who did you believe that TOLD YOU it would?

[Damocles]

To tell the truth, so long as it gets them the money they need to operate and keeps them out of my bank accounts it is an improvement even if more of the same continues...

[Immanuel]

To tell the truth, so long as it gets them the money they need to operate and keeps them out of my bank accounts it is an improvement even if more of the same continues...

Agreed, although that won't happen in this case.

What it will do that will be a major advantage is to keep me from having to file a tax return every year. I will not be paying taxes.

I will get my full paycheck every single pay period without having either FWT, SST or Medicare taken from my check.

That in and of itself will be a huge benefit for me and others especially those who live pay check to paycheck.

Immie

[Immanuel]

pleaseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, they just label it something else immie, something with a real pretty name, like "clear skys initiative" or "healthy forrest plan"...it may not be labeled a tax credit, but IT WILL BE A CREDIT of some sort NONE THE LESS!

how does a CONSUMPTION tax prevent congress from giving an incentive? It doesn't immie? Why would you think it would? Who did you believe that TOLD YOU it would?

Obvoiusly Care, you don't have a clue about how advantageous those tax credits are. When there are no income taxes there are no tax credits or tax incentives.

Immie

[Care4all]

Obvoiusly Care, you don't have a clue about how advantageous those tax credits are. When there are no income taxes there are no tax credits or tax incentives.

Immie

Immie, I will REPEAT and paste, FOR THE THIRD TIME one of my posts about this....please read it. If you don;t understand what I am saying, then could you please ask me some questions about it so that I can clarrify anything you don't understand.

I still don't see how it would be any different, they can still legislate law in other ways to accomodate their friends, like laxing Epa Regulations, absolving the payment of land lease fees in the gulf of mexico worth billions to the tax payer, paying for the pipeline from ANWR to the mainland states for the oil companies, giving credits for building new refineries, rewriting bankruptcy laws in the FAVOR of the bank without requiring them to pass these savings on to the customer, Pill bill legislation where the HMO'S AND PHARMA made out like bandits, especiall pharma not having to negotiate bulk discounts and locking us out of Canada...

Tax credits do not need to be issued immie, to give favorable legislation to the Lobbyist for the big campaign donor...

nothing CHANGES in the corruption ARENA OF THE CONGRESSMEN...nothing! :(

And as I have also mention, this does nothing to halt the wasteful spending in congress, or the corruption there...

[Immanuel]

Immie, I will REPEAT and paste, FOR THE THIRD TIME one of my posts about this....please read it. If you don;t understand what I am saying, then could you please ask me some questions about it so that I can clarrify anything you don't understand.

I still don't see how it would be any different, they can still legislate law in other ways to accomodate their friends, like laxing Epa Regulations, absolving the payment of land lease fees in the gulf of mexico worth billions to the tax payer, paying for the pipeline from ANWR to the mainland states for the oil companies, giving credits for building new refineries, rewriting bankruptcy laws in the FAVOR of the bank without requiring them to pass these savings on to the customer, Pill bill legislation where the HMO'S AND PHARMA made out like bandits, especiall pharma not having to negotiate bulk discounts and locking us out of Canada...

Tax credits do not need to be issued immie, to give favorable legislation to the Lobbyist for the big campaign donor...

nothing CHANGES in the corruption ARENA OF THE CONGRESSMEN...nothing! :(

And as I have also mention, this does nothing to halt the wasteful spending in congress, or the corruption there...

Obviously you have not read my replies to that. Once again, no one said it would eliminate all power; however, it would reduce the value of the power wielding that Congress holds on America.

Why do you ignore the other benefits such as the fact that everyone will get 100% of their paychecks without having 20-30% taken out in taxes every week or that no one will have to file a tax return or that the poor and everyone else receive a monthly check to cover the taxes that would be paid for necessities?

Don't you think an extra $450/mo might just help a poor family of 4 more than it would the rich? Don't you care about that poor family? No, I don't think you really do.

Now, I ask why do you ALWAYS expect me to answer your posts, but you ALWAYS ignore mine and everyone else's that you don't want to deal with?

Immie

[Immanuel]

And as I have also mention, this does nothing to halt the wasteful spending in congress, or the corruption there...

Another set of issues that needs to be dealt with but with people such as yourself who prefer to leave things in the status quo these items will continue to be ignored.

Immie

[Immanuel]

Why is it that everytime someone presents questions to Care she suddenly disappears? I guess someday I will come to realize this and quit asking.

Immie

[FUCK THE POLICE]

It's actually ironic that this is coming from the right.

A Guaranteed minimum income has been a staple of radical liberal platforms for the past 200 years, and in 1972, when the Democrats were their most liberal, they put it into their platform, but they had to take it out whenever the national politics swung to the right a few years later.

[Care4all]

I agree with the Author, and do not think a consumption tax or fair tax would be any better than the income tax structure that we have now.....

I disagree with you Klaatu.... :)

p.s. How's that Florida blood doing up there, at home in the cold? Had snow yet? Here we are in Maine and "niente" (nothing!) .... well, not yet, and that's a good thing cuz the cabin we are renting is on a gravel, and very steep road....with no one around....