The incredible deflation

[cncman]

And what would there be to prevent that in any other system proposed? Can you name a tax system where that wouldn't be possible? I can't. The question is, would you rather have a system where things like that can be hidden in hundreds of thousands of pages of tax code or in a system where it is so simple it is completely transparent? It is harder for them to tweak the system on a program that is as transparent as possible. With the power of taxation back on the people the politicians would not have their usual tricks to fall back on.

Originally Posted by dboat

Here is my concern. I can hear BOB or another POTUS saying, we are in a recession, we need to prime the pump, so we will increase the prebate to 95% of all American families by $xxxx.xx per year..
There will be an huge push by libs to keep increasing the prebate. They just cant help themselves.. Somehow, it will happen and then when we need to balance the budget or cut back, they will be the sacred cows.

I did at least hear a plan by one of the Repub Congressman to fix SS and Medicare the other day, where those over 55 stay in the current system and those under move to a more 401k type of system. For Medicare you would use the money to buy your own Medicare plan that would be sold by different insurance companies. If we dont move on that issue very soon, it will get really ugly by the time I retire in (hopefully) 12 years.

Dana

[dboat]

Originally Posted by cncman

And what would there be to prevent that in any other system proposed? Can you name a tax system where that wouldn't be possible? I can't. The question is, would you rather have a system where things like that can be hidden in hundreds of thousands of pages of tax code or in a system where it is so simple it is completely transparent? It is harder for them to tweak the system on a program that is as transparent as possible. With the power of taxation back on the people the politicians would not have their usual tricks to fall back on.

Actually the only thing to prevent it is the politicians themselves.. you are right.. just am pointing out that the ability to abuse this system is as great as the one we are in.. except, as I have stated before, anyone above the poverty line should have to pay something.. IMHO

Dana

[bigjohn]

What prevents the abuse is our vigilance and the transparency of this type of tax code. As for everyone paying, that is the beauty of this system0everyone will pay taxes because everyone buys stuff. How many times have we heard people whining about those folks that are poor with wide screen TV's-well, they would pay tax on it. It's fair because everyone gets the same prebate given the same family size, everyone pays taxes based upon what they decide to buy.

What's better: a tax code that was 16845 pages in 2006 and has 7 times as many words as the bible (5.6 million words) or a 133 page tax code?
What's better: a tax code that the rich pay a huge percentage (before deductions) and the poor pay absolute nothing or one where everyone that buys anything beyond the basic necessities will pay taxes?

Originally Posted by dboat

Actually the only thing to prevent it is the politicians themselves.. you are right.. just am pointing out that the ability to abuse this system is as great as the one we are in.. except, as I have stated before, anyone above the poverty line should have to pay something.. IMHO

Dana

[cncman]

The only thing to prevent it is the people. And no, the ability to abuse the system under the fair tax is far less than the current system. Look at what is happening now, the politicians want to push a "green" agenda so they use the tax code to benefit that at the expense of others. Want to reward a certain company that paid for your campaign? Propose special exemptions for that kind of business. None of that can be done with the fairtax.

Originally Posted by dboat

Actually the only thing to prevent it is the politicians themselves.. you are right.. just am pointing out that the ability to abuse this system is as great as the one we are in.. except, as I have stated before, anyone above the poverty line should have to pay something.. IMHO

Dana

[chomper]

The name fair tax is all warm n fuzzy sounding, but very deceiving, very similar to patriot act. all this scam really does is shuffle the wealth redistributors around a bit. also it would force more folks to become involuntary servants of the govt, simply to be 'allowed', to conduct personal and commercial business transactions. but, its only fair...

[cncman]

Care to flesh that out a bit? How is it a scam? How is it making people a servant of the government by letting people keep 100% of their paycheck and allowing them to decide how much tax they will pay instead of the government, putting the power in the people's hands instead of politicians? So far I haven't seen any real objections from you, except ones that show an uninformed opinion like taxes would go up under the fairtax.

Originally Posted by chomper

The name fair tax is all warm n fuzzy sounding, but very deceiving, very similar to patriot act. all this scam really does is shuffle the wealth redistributors around a bit. also it would force more folks to become involuntary servants of the govt, simply to be 'allowed', to conduct personal and commercial business transactions. but, its only fair...

[chomper]

Its a friggin scam because one of its main purposes is an attempt to seduce Americans into thinking its ok(fair) to mandate that any portion of our property be surrendered to another man or organized body of men every time we choose to conduct business private or public ... fugg dat chit(its not ok) ... how about they earn their own damn money to fullfill their needs ... novel concept ...

[Swells]

I think Chomper has a Ron Paul kind of argument, fairly libertarian. It all sounds good, but over the years we built up massive entitlement programs such as social security, Medicare, education, and so forth. These are "core" programs mandated by law, as opposed to the little bit of non-defense discretionary funding we have, which are only about one tenth of the budget. If we fail to fund these entitlement programs somehow, people will get sick and die, or somehow languish.

What you're saying is that we can fund all these socialistic programs by shifting to a new revenue source, sales taxes. That is fine but it doesn't fix these antiquated, broken systems that are such a drain to our economy. It does nothing to fix anything.

And nobody has an answer. Bush tried the concept of moving new payers to investment-grade accounts, but thank goodness that didn't happen in light of the massive bleed-off in worker 401(k) programs - untold billions wrote off and flushed down the drain and we don't get a tax credit for doing The Right Thing.

So I don't think the Fair Tax is a "scam" as much as Chomper says, other than it doesn't do anything to solve any problem other than some income redistribution ... it just moves capital around and collects it in a different way. What have you gained? To me the answer is "not much" other than renaming the IRS for another kind of tax collection service of the government. I hear the same thing from some conservatives who want to get rid of the EPA and the Department of Education.

But Chomper has a point is that some of the fast thinkers will make some Big Money off the transition to Fair Tax. To that extent, and there are always the usual scammers, it's low hanging fruit. One could start a Fair Tax consulting company and make more than Delloite-Touche or Andresen. Or, simply buy local on the black market ... bwahahahaha.

[bigjohn]

It isn't that hard...it is a tax bill and nothing but a tax bill. It is a more equitable transparent simpler way of collecting taxes. It is NOT a spending bill, so to bring up out of control government spending as an argument against a simpler tax code is simply argumentative. Any form of taxation is "wealth redistribution", so unless you propose not collecting any taxes at all, there will be "wealth redistribution". The reality is that government must levy taxes. We have to pay taxes. Our tax money is often misused and/or used in ways we disapprove. All of those are facts. The Fair Tax bill is NOT designed to address those things. It is only designed to create a simpler, more effective way of collecting the same amount of revenue without the drag on the economy income taxes and the IRS create. What you gain is keeping 100% of your money to decide what to buy and pay taxes on. What you gain is the creation of the best business environment in the world because of no corporate tax burden. What you gain is lower prices because of the removal of an embedded tax for tax compliance and costs. What you gain is April 15th becoming just another spring day. What you don't gain is some kind of solution to all the rest of the problems in government. Now...isn't that simple enough to understand?

[cncman]

OK, you win, lets keep the most convoluted, abusive, politically charged tax method known to man that allows the politicians to keep all of the power instead of those bodies of men until the government figures out a way to earn its own money. All because the fairtax improves most things but not all, that sounds like a reasonable position to take.

Originally Posted by chomper

Its a friggin scam because one of its main purposes is an attempt to seduce Americans into thinking its ok(fair) to mandate that any portion of our property be surrendered to another man or organized body of men every time we choose to conduct business private or public ... fugg dat chit(its not ok) ... how about they earn their own damn money to fullfill their needs ... novel concept ...

[cncman]

So, the fairtax reduces compliance costs, lost productivity from paralysis due to tax implications, allows people to keep all of their pay and decide how much tax they want to pay, eliminates thousands of pages of abusive tax code, brings billions in additional capital to the states and makes the US the biggest tax haven in the world and that means nothing to you? And even though prices won't change there is going to be some rush to the black market that we don't see now? What happens when those black marketers go spend their money on stuff? Or are we to believe they are just going to pile that cash up under their mattress?

Originally Posted by Swells

I think Chomper has a Ron Paul kind of argument, fairly libertarian. It all sounds good, but over the years we built up massive entitlement programs such as social security, Medicare, education, and so forth. These are "core" programs mandated by law, as opposed to the little bit of non-defense discretionary funding we have, which are only about one tenth of the budget. If we fail to fund these entitlement programs somehow, people will get sick and die, or somehow languish.

What you're saying is that we can fund all these socialistic programs by shifting to a new revenue source, sales taxes. That is fine but it doesn't fix these antiquated, broken systems that are such a drain to our economy. It does nothing to fix anything.

And nobody has an answer. Bush tried the concept of moving new payers to investment-grade accounts, but thank goodness that didn't happen in light of the massive bleed-off in worker 401(k) programs - untold billions wrote off and flushed down the drain and we don't get a tax credit for doing The Right Thing.

So I don't think the Fair Tax is a "scam" as much as Chomper says, other than it doesn't do anything to solve any problem other than some income redistribution ... it just moves capital around and collects it in a different way. What have you gained? To me the answer is "not much" other than renaming the IRS for another kind of tax collection service of the government. I hear the same thing from some conservatives who want to get rid of the EPA and the Department of Education.

But Chomper has a point is that some of the fast thinkers will make some Big Money off the transition to Fair Tax. To that extent, and there are always the usual scammers, it's low hanging fruit. One could start a Fair Tax consulting company and make more than Delloite-Touche or Andresen. Or, simply buy local on the black market ... bwahahahaha.

[Swells]

No, you're both missing the point. If we didn't spend so freaking much money we wouldn't have to tax ourselves so much. Fair tax was based on 23 cents on the dollar, a 30 percent tax, which was based on all the existing expenditures.

You're not going to save a dang penny and if you think you are, please tell me how. I hear BS like bazillions of dollars but it sounds like an idle wish that cannot be proven with fact.

So cut the crap. About 3 or 4 studies seemed to indicate that 23 to 24 cents on the dollar was equivalent to the federal income tax system we pay today. It is exactly the same. You will not save money or do a lick better. You don't like hearing that, which is understandable.

You don't save any money or make more profits. It is just changing something simple for something complex as for taxation. Face it, there is no proof, guarantee, or illusion that such a Fair Tax would do a darn thing to improve the economy, and Chomper is right about that call.

[bigjohn]

You are so close to getting it-yes-it is revenue nuetral, meaning it will bring in the same amount as what the income tax does. It does not reduce our taxes. It is not a tax cutting bill-doesn't pretend to be. So what you are saying is that since it is revenue neutral it is no better than the income tax? Your position is actually that no corporate taxes won't enhance business and create jobs? You're saying that corporations will not come to the US if we have no corporate taxes? You're saying everything will remain just as it is? You're saying there is no advantage in keeping all of our paychecks? You're saying that there is no advantage to a simpler more transparent tax code? You're saying that since it isn't a tx cut it is no better? Geez...

[chomper]

Originally Posted by cncman

OK, you win, lets keep the most convoluted, abusive, politically charged tax method known to man that allows the politicians to keep all of the power instead of those bodies of men until the government figures out a way to earn its own money. All because the fairtax improves most things but not all, that sounds like a reasonable position to take.

What the heck do I win ? My plan is not what you just stated. You seem to be preaching to the choir. My plan consists of a will to have more freedom and less slavery.... does the govt have to take 100% of our property in order for us to define the citizens of this country as slaves ? 23% does it in my mind .... its my damn property... get chur effing hands off it ... thats my stance ... No compromise ... Think whiskey rebellion ... Swells makes a good point though about initial potential problems that may occur from eliminating the illegal 'core' programs... But the bottom line is they will all come to an end. Even the supporters of them admit that fact, perhaps sooner than later ... China aint gonna keep supporting our debt forever... I take care of mine bidness, you take care of yours... It would restore a helluva lot of honor back into our culture too ... which is something we are greatly lacking .... I demand satisfaction !

[cncman]

For someone that usually has well thought out posts you seem to be basing your new argument on a completely false premise. That since the fairtax collects about the same amount of revenue as now (revenue neutral) that there is no savings to us. That isn't well thought out at all. There are several parts to consider, not only the actual revenue collected, but the administration costs of collecting that revenue, the drag on those paying the tax, and the penalties from decisions made by businesses and individuals based on tax consequences. What happens when you stop penalizing growth, entrepenuership and productivity? When I don't have a penalty for trying to go out there and make more money? What happens when you elimintate the IRS that wastes about 20-30 cents of every dollar it takes in? What happens when you earn $250,000 a year but you already own your own home and land, vehicles and are a frugal spender? You don't save any money? Do you really want to take the absurd position that the current system does not paralyze growth because of tax consequences? Do you really want to say that there is NO compliance costs whatsoever in complying with the current income tax system? Clearly anyone with even the most casual familiarity with business and economics would never suggest such a thing.

Originally Posted by Swells

No, you're both missing the point. If we didn't spend so freaking much money we wouldn't have to tax ourselves so much. Fair tax was based on 23 cents on the dollar, a 30 percent tax, which was based on all the existing expenditures.

You're not going to save a dang penny and if you think you are, please tell me how. I hear BS like bazillions of dollars but it sounds like an idle wish that cannot be proven with fact.

So cut the crap. About 3 or 4 studies seemed to indicate that 23 to 24 cents on the dollar was equivalent to the federal income tax system we pay today. It is exactly the same. You will not save money or do a lick better. You don't like hearing that, which is understandable.

You don't save any money or make more profits. It is just changing something simple for something complex as for taxation. Face it, there is no proof, guarantee, or illusion that such a Fair Tax would do a darn thing to improve the economy, and Chomper is right about that call.

[nokatchin]

How bout them Saints? Who Dat

[bigjohn]

Yo sound suspiciously like you are saying that any taxation is bad and you are against it? Okay-let's think Whiskey Revolution: The whiskey revolution came from stillers that did not sale their whiskey-they used it in trade for goods and services. They never collected a dime for their whiskey, but they were expected to pay the taxes anyway. They had no money to pay taxes because they did not sale their whiskey, so about 5,000 of them marched on the capital and were promptly dispersed. So how does that equate to this issue other then the fact that we will have to pay taxes no matter what-we have paid taxes since G. Washington days (he placed the first tax on, you guessed it, whiskey). The rampant, ot of control spending in Washington has nothing to do with how we collect taxes. It is a separate issue. So, since we have to pay taxes, which way would you prefer to pay taxes? That is the only real question.

Originally Posted by chomper

What the heck do I win ? My plan is not what you just stated. You seem to be preaching to the choir. My plan consists of a will to have more freedom and less slavery.... does the govt have to take 100% of our property in order for us to define the citizens of this country as slaves ? 23% does it in my mind .... its my damn property... get chur effing hands off it ... thats my stance ... No compromise ... Think whiskey rebellion ... Swells makes a good point though about initial potential problems that may occur from eliminating the illegal 'core' programs... But the bottom line is they will all come to an end. Even the supporters of them admit that fact, perhaps sooner than later ... China aint gonna keep supporting our debt forever... I take care of mine bidness, you take care of yours... It would restore a helluva lot of honor back into our culture too ... which is something we are greatly lacking .... I demand satisfaction !

[chomper]

We bit suspicious sounding eh? You got my point. The first president demanded property from his fellow countrymen and soldiers after they just lost their fathers, brothers sons, mothers, sisters, and daughters etc. fighting a bloody war for independence bout that ol same thing - another man demanding too damn much of his fellow mans property ... same as it ever was ...
So, how do I want to pay taxes you ask? I dont want other peoples property confiscated from them by force or the threat thereof. I dont want my property confiscated by force or the threat thereof. Period. That is not too much to ask from my fellow man, is it? Most importantly, free men are not forced members(slaves) of any personal property confiscation and/or redistibution system of law and/or business. We need to work towards the restoration of personal responsibilty, honor and respect in this country. Rearranging the puppet show strings just dont even come close to gettin it done..

[Swells]

I've been riding you guys too long but I have a nice conversation with my Libertarian friend from Dallas tonight, here on SPI. He said "yeah, there some that like the Fair Tax, the VAT, and the flat tax, but all want to get rid of the IRS."

I commented that getting rid of the IRS was pretty stupid, since bureaucracy always seemed to get bigger no matter what the Republicans did. In fact, Bush made it worse than ever.

"Yeah that's right too, but I don't like 'em."

What surprised me was that as a tard-core Libertarian, we seemed pretty progressive and realistic in his views. "Income tax and Fair Tax are still highly visible and a VAT is totally invisible to the consumer and the consumer pays no taxes at all," he added. "But I don't think America will ever head that way."

So I said that was pretty smart thinking. We talked about tea-baggers and Obama socialists for a while, laughing about their extreme positions. I guess if I had a vote about a Fair Tax, I'd vote yes more than ever now. Just remember, there ain't many Libertarians out there.

[cncman]

Sounds like a good time. One thing your friend isn't correct about is saying under the VAT the consumer pays no taxes, corporations don't pay taxes they collect them. Any tax on production limits production and gets paid by the end user, the consumer. Not to mention wage depression by the businesses that have to pay the VAT. Glad to have your vote if it ever comes up, fairtax supporters aren't just libertarians, in fact most aren't. The supporters come from every walk of life and every political persuasion.

Originally Posted by Swells

I've been riding you guys too long but I have a nice conversation with my Libertarian friend from Dallas tonight, here on SPI. He said "yeah, there some that like the Fair Tax, the VAT, and the flat tax, but all want to get rid of the IRS."

I commented that getting rid of the IRS was pretty stupid, since bureaucracy always seemed to get bigger no matter what the Republicans did. In fact, Bush made it worse than ever.

"Yeah that's right too, but I don't like 'em."

What surprised me was that as a tard-core Libertarian, we seemed pretty progressive and realistic in his views. "Income tax and Fair Tax are still highly visible and a VAT is totally invisible to the consumer and the consumer pays no taxes at all," he added. "But I don't think America will ever head that way."

So I said that was pretty smart thinking. We talked about tea-baggers and Obama socialists for a while, laughing about their extreme positions. I guess if I had a vote about a Fair Tax, I'd vote yes more than ever now. Just remember, there ain't many Libertarians out there.