The Fairtax.

[Lounge Daddy]

[url="http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer"]The FairTax[/url]--so simple and practical, it is just too mind-blowing for many politicians.

[img]http://www.redplanetcartoons.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/8222007_fairtax_cavemen.jpg[/img]

[kujo]

Couldn't agree more, my friend. When I read up on the Fair Tax, I actually had one of those moments of clarity and said "Wow, what a good idea. Why don't we use that?" Then I heard John Edwards start talking about the "two Americas" and it all made sense.

[Aloysius]

Neanderthals were, according to all archaelogical evidence, much more intelligent, caring, and even possibly religious than our ancestors that were their contemporaries.

lol... I suppose that misses the point though

[Didymus]

[quote]Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.[/quote]
FDR

[Aloysius]

in addition, taxes should be levied according to what the government has legitimate authority to collect them from. income tax is arguable at best. but taxes on transactions that occur in the public domain like sales are basically legitimate as they do not attack the productivity of a person only his spending... limit those taxes on public domain transactions like sales

i am of the firm opinion that the payment of a salary to an employee should NOT be considered a transaction in the public domain. I think I've had some wildly ridiculous debates with dairygirl on this issue before that really goes off into left field topics a million times lol, but that is my opinion: the wealth which an individual produces through his work he deserves to be granted and because he earns and fully deserves every cent of the fruit of his labor, this is not a public transaction. it is a full and absolute debt owed by the employer to the employee privately. the employer does not owe it to the government and is not engaging in some public purchase but is engaging in a private payment of debt for services and Uncle Sam should not be skimming off the top.

a sale, on the other hand, is a public transaction. sales of non-necessities should be taxed; everything from video games to tobacco to alcohol to yachts makes perfect sense to be taxed... food, property, income, transportation vehicles (excepting, possibly, luxury cars), and gasoline should not be taxed. I disagree with the principal that a government even has the authority to tax such things. in addition, a sales tax does not consist of skimming off the top, but rather of charging a certain price to the vendor (passed on to the consumer) for the right to sell things in the public marketplace for which the state provides the freedom.

FDR... sorry, don't like him as a president. in the persuit of solving the problems of his day, he created many more long term problems. i am of the opinion that many other things could have been done to better and more efficiently solve the problems of his day in a more lasting way. am I a monday morning quarterback? yep. are criticizers of Herbert Hoover monday morning quarterbacks? you betchya. I'd side with a good man like Hoover any day of the week. anyway, I don't look up to FDR as a man on whom I base my american political principals, no matter how loomingly he looks at me from mount rushmore.

[Lounge Daddy]

The Fair Tax [url="http://grandrapidslibertarian.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/fairtax-featured-on-wikipedia/"]was featured on Wikipedia[/url] the other day.

[CatherineM]

FDR isn't on Mount Rushmore.

I remember having a discussion/debate about taxes in tax law class in law school. My professor was for a national sales tax. Those with low income would be able to get percentages of their refunded (like they do with GST in Canada). This would get money from wealthier people just because they buy more. It would also tax those who avoid taxes or work cash only like drug dealers, prostitutes, mafia, etc. It would trim a few jobs out of the government from the IRS, and put H&R Block in bankruptcy. If someone didn't want to be taxed as much, they could buy a cheaper car, or just keep using their old one. I guess that wouldn't be too good for an economy based on buy, buy, buy.

[aalpha1989]

I actually sent letters concerning FairTax to both my senators and received answers from both. I love Brownback.

[ardillacid]

Obama said that he would support fair tax if the whole system was starting over, but he thinks reform would be too tough now

[Hassan]

[quote name='notardillacid' post='1601322' date='Jul 16 2008, 04:29 PM']Obama said that he would support fair tax if the whole system was starting over, but he thinks reform would be too tough now [/quote]


He's correct. Unless you think it is presently likely for a constitutional ammednment to get passed.


As for the fair tax, how is it working in Iraq? What has the feedback been?

[ardillacid]

They passed a constitutional amendment to get the income tax. What's the problem with passing an amendment again, Hassan?

[Hassan]

[quote name='notardillacid' post='1601339' date='Jul 16 2008, 04:49 PM']They passed a constitutional amendment to get the income tax. What's the problem with passing an amendment again, Hassan?[/quote]


The country is to ideologically divided and angry. The fairtax is seen as a neo-conservative brainchild. After these last eight years liberals/(most)democrats seem to view anything associated with the neo-conservatives as toxic. I'm not saying it's fair, I know very little about the fair tax(in terms of it's viability). After Iraq, Gitmo, and the numerous other antics of Mr. Bush and his friends a large portion of the population just isin't willing to listen to the right on anything.

I just don't think that the necessary unity is present in the country. And given the present economey most people arn't keen on playing with the structure of our economic system. The income system may be despised, however "better the evil you know than the evil you don't know". People won't be willing to make such a radical move without strong empericle evidence that the model is viable.

in my oppinion.

[Lounge Daddy]

Ya, it cracks me up when the FairTax is dismissed as a "neo-conservative brainchild" when it is the only tax system that places the power of taxation out of the hands of the politicians and into the hands of "We The People," and it effectively un-taxes the poorest Americans.

[dairygirl4u2c]

it's deceptively simple. as is often the case with simple things.

www.fairtax.org

at first glance, it's easy and simple... and in a sense it's progressive. poorer people get a pay back for what they pay out up to a certain amount. so even if it's a necessity, it does not matter cause poor get pay back refund. effectively, that pay back also creates a staired income scale, cause everyone gets the pay back, but the richer are affected by it less, such taht they pay closer to the 23% flat sales tax in the end.

the flaw that many don't know about,,,, or won't say... it that while it's progressive in that sense, and it appears on the surface to be legit.... the rich don't pay more as a percentage, they only pay more in dollars. this is because they dont spend enough: if A has 1000 and spends 100, and B has 10000 and spends 500, A still spent more than B did as a percentage.

so while it might be promoted as progressive.... it's really progressively regressive. ultimately regressive.
most conservatives are pretty reasonable, at least as far as saying they promote the flat tax.... and they wouldn't often go so far as to say hey want something regressive where the poor pay th same dollar value as the rich or less as a percentage. (of course, there's some who want a flat tax in terms of not a percentage but a set dollar amount) yet, this is essentially a regresive tax that they'd not normally go for, had they know what this tax really means.
maybe you're the type that goes for all pay the same dollar values,,, or you see that the rich pay more dollars but less as a percent, as a trade off.
whatever you believe.... just make sure you know what you're advocating. know that it's a regressive tax, that most even conservatives don't go for, when they know the details.

Edited July 17, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1602258' date='Jul 17 2008, 06:32 PM']the flaw that many don't know about,,,, or won't say... it that while it's progressive in that sense, and it appears on the surface to be legit.... the rich don't pay more as a percentage, they only pay more in dollars.[/quote]
Oh they say it. There are at least two books, and one audio-book that detail it all. It effectively un-taxes the poor, while at the same it doesn't punish people for making economic gains. (As a bonus, this makes it impossible for politicians to use the tax system for class warfare purposes every election season)

Our current tax system both taxes the poor, and strongly punishes success (therefore it discourages productivity). The FairTax is win-win for everyone.

One other very attractive element. It places a great amount of political leverage in the hands of regular ordinary citizens. If you don't like something that your government is considering, you can actually threaten to not pay taxes! This is because you are not taxed for the regular necessities of life. You can decide not to make any purchases outside of that for a time if you wish--or order extra items outside of your un-taxed necessities online. It's fantastic!