Huckleberry Finn's "Fair Tax"

[Parkbandit]

While I'm not for Mike Huckabee for President.. I did look at his 'Fair Tax' endorsement and I think I'm actually for it.

Essentially, it's a sales tax put on all goods and services purchased.

I love the idea because it accounts for all the scumbag deadbeats in our society currently not paying shit.. people like drug dealers, prostitutes, illegals, etc...

I love that I wouldn't have to pay an accountant to do my corporate taxes anymore.

I love that it deals with poverty in the form of a monthly rebate check given to everyone each month.

I would love to get rid of the stupid IRS and their stupid, stupid, stupid people who can't fucking get anything right.

What I don't like about it is:

How easy would it be to cheat? I could just cross the border into another country and do my shopping there... or buy my goods on the Internet.

It would ruin the new car business.. as people would only buy used cars and save the 30% off the price.

It would make me less likely to buy a new gadget if the price was $1300 instead of $1000. I realize that I am actually paying more for that gadget now.. but it's still a sticker shock of sorts.


I love the idea of a fair tax.. but like anything.. I think it sounds too good to really be true.

[Daniel]

It will screw over poor people.

[Parkbandit]

It will screw over poor people.


I know.. the fair tax hates poor and black people. We know Daniel.


But how? If you get a monthly rebate check.. and you have your full paycheck at your disposal.. how exactly is it going to screw any poor person? They essentially pay no taxes.

[Daniel]

Because the rebate checks will be processed by the government and will likely not keep up with current expenditure reality.

It's like the problem with the Pell Grant, the G.I Bill and the minimum wage. They don't really reflect what people need currently. They did at one point, but they've lagged behind as the economy has improved.

As you said, rich people with the resources will do their best to circumvent the tax.

In concept it's a good idea. In practicality, it's not.

[Jorddyn]

Essentially, it's a sales tax put on all goods and services purchased.

Which, by nature, makes it (semi)regressive. The rebate helps with this but does not entirely solve the problem.


I love the idea because it accounts for all the scumbag deadbeats in our society currently not paying shit.. people like drug dealers, prostitutes, illegals, etc...

They're currently required to file and pay taxes on illegal income. I can't imagine that they'd suddenly decide to do so simply because the structure of taxation changed.


I love that I wouldn't have to pay an accountant to do my corporate taxes anymore.

This is entirely possible. Eek, we'll fill the welfare lines with accountants!


I love that it deals with poverty in the form of a monthly rebate check given to everyone each month.

Remember the $300 mid year check a few years back? Remember how much they spent to get that sent out? Yea, multiply that by 12 for the annual cost.


I would love to get rid of the stupid IRS and their stupid, stupid, stupid people who can't fucking get anything right.

Now if only we could also get rid of the ones who wrote the law..


How easy would it be to cheat? I could just cross the border into another country and do my shopping there... or buy my goods on the Internet.

People cheat now. People would cheat then. It'd just be in different ways.


It would ruin the new car business.. as people would only buy used cars and save the 30% off the price.

It'll initially drive used car prices up, then level off. People will consider that 30% tax just part of the price of the car, and used car prices will adjust accordingly.


It would make me less likely to buy a new gadget if the price was $1300 instead of $1000. I realize that I am actually paying more for that gadget now.. but it's still a sticker shock of sorts.

But you'd be taking home 30% more, so it would be a wash. It'd just take some getting used to, like going metric.

/devil's advocate

[Krendeli]

They're currently required to file and pay taxes on illegal income. I can't imagine that they'd suddenly decide to do so simply because the structure of taxation changed.

They don't get to decide if they pay the taxes or not under the new system. They are forced to pay it when they go buy their new bling.

[Parkbandit]

Which, by nature, makes it (semi)regressive. The rebate helps with this but does not entirely solve the problem.

I don't think anything will ever entirely solve the problem.




They're currently required to file and pay taxes on illegal income. I can't imagine that they'd suddenly decide to do so simply because the structure of taxation changed.


Untrue in practice though. How many drug dealers do you know that actually report any of their ill gotten income? They launder money and pay the taxes on a very small portion of their total cash. If they want to go out and buy something, they simply pay for it in cash.. which is not included in their reporting to the IRS. With the Fair Tax, they will be forced to pay at the transaction.



This is entirely possible. Eek, we'll fill the welfare lines with accountants!

They won't be unemployed for long though.




Remember the $300 mid year check a few years back? Remember how much they spent to get that sent out? Yea, multiply that by 12 for the annual cost.

That was a one time thing.. not a monthly occurance. Obviously.. even our inept government will be able to do this.. as they already do this in many of our handout programs.



People cheat now. People would cheat then. It'd just be in different ways.

That goes without saying. Which way is easier to cheat though?

[landy]

I wonder what the immediate and long term effects on the local American economy would be, if it could survive the initial shock it's a fairly good way to address current inequalities in the tax system.

[Gan]

Congress will never go for it because it creates a huge variable in their income. That variable being dependant on whether or not people spend or save.

Whereas under the current system, its a reasonable expectation that people will work for their pay, and when they get paid so does the government. Sure we're a nation of consumers and thus people will buy/spend and thus pay the tax on each purchase, but the choice will be on the consumer instead of on the wage earner.

That being said, I like this kind of tax structure because it penalizes consumption and not production. It encourages people to save, and it penalizes frivolity.

As far as increasing prices across the board, I agree with the earlier statement that it would be a wash. Thats just a mindset the consumer will quickly adapt to. I also agree with the cheating theory, people will find a way to get around it. Simply because the people paying the taxes will have a greater incentive to find the loophole than the people making the law to collect it. That and there are smarter people on the paying side than on the taxing side. Thus the laws and the amendments will always be reactionary.

With regards to expense on sending out the rebate checks. I think the costs will be about the same or less than what it takes to currently publish the current tax code, distribute all the tax returns (forms, etc.), pay the massive jugernaught of the IRS and its myriad payroll base.

[landy]

I also wonder, if the government could no longer count on a steady amount of tax revenue, how could this affect current or future social programs?

[Gan]

I also wonder, if the government could no longer count on a steady amount of tax revenue, how could this affect current or future social programs?

Force Government to become more efficient (spending, management, enforcement, etc.

[Celephais]

This would cause the value of the dollar to drop abroad wouldn't it? Because amercian dollars would be considered "pre-tax" dollars, especially if we taxed imported goods to ensure the whole buying out of country thing doesn't become an issue.

Either way I do like it, simplicity is better.

[Latrinsorm]

Force Government to become more efficient (spending, management, enforcement, etc.Too often a large organization's idea of efficiency is abandonment, though. Doesn't the idea that we would absolutely need a historically inefficient organization to rapidly become more efficient make you a little nervous?

[Gan]

This would cause the value of the dollar to drop abroad wouldn't it? Because amercian dollars would be considered "pre-tax" dollars, especially if we taxed imported goods to ensure the whole buying out of country thing doesn't become an issue.

Either way I do like it, simplicity is better.

I guess it would depend on how exports are taxed.

[radamanthys]

FairTax advocates claim that their plan would repeal of the 16th Amendment. However, all H.R. 25 does is repeal Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that relates to income taxes and self-employment taxes and Subtitle C that relates to payroll taxes and the withholding of income taxes. The only mention of the 16th Amendment in H.R. 25 is when it says: "Congress further finds that the 16th amendment to the United States Constitution should be repealed."

To repeal the 16th Amendment would require a constitutional amendment. Can Congress be relied on to pass a constitutional amendment that repeals the 16th amendment after a national sales tax has already been enacted? And even if Congress passed a constitutional amendment, it would still have to be approved by three-fourths of the states. Without the repeal of the 16th Amendment, what is to prevent an income tax from being imposed again after a national sales tax has been enacted?

Although the FairTax would eliminate the filing of all individual tax returns, the FairTax turns every business into a tax collector. Every small service business and every Internet business that does not currently collect state sales taxes will have to collect taxes for the federal government. Every doctor will now have to charge sales tax on his services. Where will this end? Will the neighborhood boy who mows lawns have to begin collecting federal sales tax on each lawn mowed? Will the neighborhood girl who baby sits have to do likewise?

The national retail sales tax rate under the FairTax plan is 23 percent. That is on top of state sales taxes that are currently collected by forty-five states. That is on top of the sales tax that many cities and counties also collect. That is on top of the special taxes that exist on hotel rooms in most areas of the country. I suppose that a national retail sales tax would also apply to gasoline. There is no mention of the federal gas tax anywhere in the Fair Tax Act of 2005. No list of taxes that are supposed to be eliminated under the FairTax includes the federal gas tax. Does this mean that there will be an additional 23 percent tax on each gallon of gasoline?

The FairTax will make it easier for Congress to raise taxes. The initial rate of 23 percent is supposed to begin in 2007. For years after 2007, "the rate of tax is the combined Federal tax rate percentage." This combined percentage is the total of three things: the general revenue rate (stated to be 14.91 percent); the old-age, survivors and disability insurance rate; and the hospital insurance rate. This is all but saying that the rate will be adjusted every year. And it will be very easy for Congress to do so. To raise several billion dollars of additional revenue, all that will be necessary is for Congress to raise the tax rate by one percentage point by small adjustments in one or more of the three items that make up the combined percentage rate. It will be sold to the American people as "a penny for progress," or some other deceitful scheme.


http://www.mises.org/story/1814

[Hulkein]

What's the deal with the monthly rebate? Anyone care to explain that more? I haven't read much about the Fair Tax.

[Parkbandit]

What's the deal with the monthly rebate? Anyone care to explain that more? I haven't read much about the Fair Tax.

I think the way it works is:

Let's say the poverty level is $12,000 a year. Everyone gets a check from the government for $1,000 a month. Essentially, the poor do not pay any taxes this way.

[Krendeli]

Be damned if I'm paying a hobo to live on the streets.

[Parkbandit]

Be damned if I'm paying a hobo to live on the streets.


You already are.

[Jorddyn]

They don't get to decide if they pay the taxes or not under the new system. They are forced to pay it when they go buy their new bling.

Doh. I misunderstood - thought he meant they'd be collecting the tax on their services.



That was a one time thing.. not a monthly occurance. Obviously.. even our inept government will be able to do this.. as they already do this in many of our handout programs.

There's no program in the nation that sends checks to every single person once per month. I'm just imagining all of the people who are born, die, or move, and wonder just how many people will be required to manage and update that list in comparison to the IRS. Not saying it'd be more, just wondering.


Be damned if I'm paying a hobo to live on the streets.

That makes me wonder... is new home construction covered in this? It'd be an interesting way to "fix" the current mortgage problem. New homes instantly increase around 30% in "value". Older homes instantly increase around 30% in "value". Anyone who has been unable to get out of their mortgage or sell their house for the balance suddenly can. Of course, it still means a glut on the market, and a bunch of people having to move, but at least they're not out a house while still owing the bank $20,000. I'm sure there's a flaw in my logic here. What am I missing?

[Keller]

You make the "fair" tax progressive by taxing "luxury" items at higher rates.

[Kembal]

The monthly rebate check plan is a recipe for abuse, waste, and corruption. It's nowhere close to practical.

[Tsa`ah]

....posted article....

http://www.mises.org/story/1814


The author of the article takes an alarmist stance and attempts to stretch and skew.

1. Anyone that writes a paycheck is already a tax collector. Any business that sells any tangible item is already a tax collector. It's nothing more than a software upgrade for most. If there's an easy way to cheat the system, it's from this point

2. Taxing services is not as straight forward as the author would like everyone to believe, and I doubt we'll see a tax for services rendered. The taxation comes out the other end when that income is used to purchase items.

3. A national gas tax, or consumption tax, should be included in this figure. Why should I shoulder the burden (through utilities and such) for some asshat that drives a Hummer?


Be damned if I'm paying a hobo to live on the streets.

Unless they're collecting a government check, you're not.

Though this is a sad statement considering the number of homeless that are veterans. I'd much rather spend the money taking care of homeless, especially those that served their country, than paying for someone's 3 bed, 2.5 bath apt, 40 inch flat screen, pimped out ride and all associated bling.

[Tsa`ah]

The monthly rebate check plan is a recipe for abuse, waste, and corruption. It's nowhere close to practical.

Every system is, including the system we currently use.

[Warriorbird]

I like some of the proposals I've seen for it. Doesn't mean it'll happen.

[Parkbandit]

You make the "fair" tax progressive by taxing "luxury" items at higher rates.

Why do you have to make things so.. progressive?

People who earn more money tend to buy more.. and thus will shoulder a higher tax burden.

It's called a fair tax.. because it's fair. It's not called a socialist tax or progressive tax. The whole reason to change the tax laws is because it's a clusterfuck... no reason to change the fair tax into the clusterfuck II tax unless it becomes necessary.

[Parkbandit]

There's no program in the nation that sends checks to every single person once per month. I'm just imagining all of the people who are born, die, or move, and wonder just how many people will be required to manage and update that list in comparison to the IRS. Not saying it'd be more, just wondering.




I actually agree. I can't count on our Government to not fuck something simple up.. let alone fuck this up.

How sweet is it that illegal aliens would not only pay taxes just like us.. but that they wouldn't get rebate checks in the mail (if the system actually worked) 22 million non-tax payers are suddenly paying taxes. We can pay for ALOT of handout programs just with that.

[Tsa`ah]

I actually agree. I can't count on our Government to not fuck something simple up.. let alone fuck this up.

How sweet is it that illegal aliens would not only pay taxes just like us.. but that they wouldn't get rebate checks in the mail (if the system actually worked) 22 million non-tax payers are suddenly paying taxes. We can pay for ALOT of handout programs just with that.

Well, not really.

This is migrant worker central next to Cali. Purely from personal observations, they pack themselves 10-15 into a 3 bedroom tornado targets or anything else that's cheap and live on the bare necessities. A large chunk of their earnings are sent south of the border weekly ... never to be taxed again. This would be a boon for the illegals since the identity they've stolen won't see anything outside of state and social security deductions ... not to mention a possible rebate that will be sent ... you guessed it ... south of the border.

[Krendeli]

Unless they're collecting a government check, you're not.

Though this is a sad statement considering the number of homeless that are veterans. I'd much rather spend the money taking care of homeless, especially those that served their country, than paying for someone's 3 bed, 2.5 bath apt, 40 inch flat screen, pimped out ride and all associated bling.

And a homeless vet is typically someone who gave up on the system. They have the opportunity either through the GI Bill, grants, and gov't loans to go to college or a trade school. If they can't do that, then why not put them in a field picking lettuce or behind a register at McD's? Because they're either too damned lazy to do it or too damned proud. Both of which is their fault.

Dan
Air Force vet

[Sean of the Thread]

And a homeless vet is typically someone who gave up on the system. They have the opportunity either through the GI Bill, grants, and gov't loans to go to college or a trade school. If they can't do that, then why not put them in a field picking lettuce or behind a register at McD's? Because they're either too damned lazy to do it or too damned proud. Both of which is their fault.

Dan
Air Force vet

rofl @ air force vet. I'm sure the psychological trauma you suffered at the salad bar caused you to make such a dumb ass statement.

[Tsa`ah]

And a homeless vet is typically someone who gave up on the system. They have the opportunity either through the GI Bill, grants, and gov't loans to go to college or a trade school. If they can't do that, then why not put them in a field picking lettuce or behind a register at McD's? Because they're either too damned lazy to do it or too damned proud. Both of which is their fault.

Dan
Air Force vet

Ever served in direct combat? Meaning on the ground, taking fire, actually having more than a second to see what you're shooting and the results?

I think you've detached yourself a bit too much and are throwing out bullshit to cover your poor choice of gripes.

In 2006, half a million vets were homeless. I'm sorry, but to say that a half a million vets, most of whom served in combat, are too lazy or too proud is not only a statistical improbability, but completely jumps the track of logic. They didn't give up on the system, the system gave up on them.

Guess what, the number keeps going up every time troops return home from either current front. Maybe, just maybe, you need to pull your head out of your ass and read into it.

[Gan]

How sweet is it that illegal aliens would not only pay taxes just like us.. but that they wouldn't get rebate checks in the mail (if the system actually worked) 22 million non-tax payers are suddenly paying taxes. We can pay for ALOT of handout programs just with that.

Between the illegals and the drug dealers, it would be like hitting the fucking lottery.

*on second thought.

With the illegals that send their money home, we wouldnt see a dime except their travel and living expenses while they were here working. :(

We already do see some of these items taxed to a certain extent by those with those gains paying for items that have sales tax associated with it. Its just not at a higher rate.

[Sean of the Thread]

Let's keep in mind it's becoming increasingly hard x2 to move money around that freely making it much harder for them to shuffle the money "home"

This will be my last season gambling overseas as well for related reasons.

[crb]

Because the rebate checks will be processed by the government and will likely not keep up with current expenditure reality.

It's like the problem with the Pell Grant, the G.I Bill and the minimum wage. They don't really reflect what people need currently. They did at one point, but they've lagged behind as the economy has improved.

As you said, rich people with the resources will do their best to circumvent the tax.

In concept it's a good idea. In practicality, it's not.
I'm assuming you're a liberal aye? For hillary care aye?

Isn't it a contradiction to not trust to government to pay you a rebate check but to trust the government to pay for all your healthcare?

[crb]

I actually agree. I can't count on our Government to not fuck something simple up.. let alone fuck this up.

How sweet is it that illegal aliens would not only pay taxes just like us.. but that they wouldn't get rebate checks in the mail (if the system actually worked) 22 million non-tax payers are suddenly paying taxes. We can pay for ALOT of handout programs just with that.
^^

[Kembal]

I actually agree. I can't count on our Government to not fuck something simple up.. let alone fuck this up.

How sweet is it that illegal aliens would not only pay taxes just like us.. but that they wouldn't get rebate checks in the mail (if the system actually worked) 22 million non-tax payers are suddenly paying taxes. We can pay for ALOT of handout programs just with that.

Erm...a good portion of them pay income taxes already. Since they use a fake social security number, their employer does the necessary withholdings. They just never get the refund.

Only day laborers and others paid in cash are for certain not paying taxes. I assume migrant farm workers aren't paying taxes as well, but that I am not wholly sure as well.

There wouldn't be much of a revenue windfall from such a change like you're expecting.

[Tsa`ah]

Let's keep in mind it's becoming increasingly hard x2 to move money around that freely making it much harder for them to shuffle the money "home"

Sure, through conventional means any of us would use such as a bank or lending institution. Services such as Western Union? Hell ... the USPS.

Cash has no problems, no real road blocks, no real checks when sent from an illegal state side to a recipient in Mexico.

Hell, Western Union makes this even easier now because it allows direct transfers from a credit card to banks in Mexico. It's pretty simple. Paycheck -> Green Dot card -> Western Union -> Mexican Bank -> Cash withdrawal by account holder.

That's assuming these people don't mind coughing up the service charges weekly or monthly ... otherwise it's large bills folded into a few page letter, stuffed into a security envelope with a USPS stamp and a Mexican destination.

[Stanley Burrell]

It's almost as if the government doesn't want to lend out money or something.

[Gan]

Sure, through conventional means any of us would use such as a bank or lending institution. Services such as Western Union? Hell ... the USPS.

Cash has no problems, no real road blocks, no real checks when sent from an illegal state side to a recipient in Mexico.

Hell, Western Union makes this even easier now because it allows direct transfers from a credit card to banks in Mexico. It's pretty simple. Paycheck -> Green Dot card -> Western Union -> Mexican Bank -> Cash withdrawal by account holder.

That's assuming these people don't mind coughing up the service charges weekly or monthly ... otherwise it's large bills folded into a few page letter, stuffed into a security envelope with a USPS stamp and a Mexican destination.

^^

My thoughts exactly. Western Union is big in the immigrant areas here in Houston.

[Daniel]

rofl @ air force vet. I'm sure the psychological trauma you suffered at the salad bar caused you to make such a dumb ass statement.

x2

[Daniel]

I'm assuming you're a liberal aye? For hillary care aye?

Isn't it a contradiction to not trust to government to pay you a rebate check but to trust the government to pay for all your healthcare?

What? Try again without making wild half assed assumptions about what I believe.

[chillmonster]

From what you posted, this is unfairly biased against poor and middle class, and depending on how the rebate would be structured, the middle class would be hit hardest. It doesn't tax dividend gains or stock purchases. People who make millions a year and only spend a fraction of their income on tangible goods and services will pay very little as a percentage of income. Large businesses that buy most of their goods from overseas, are media entities, or are based in the service industry would effectively have their taxes eliminated; and all of the others would enjoy a huge tax cut.

If the flat tax rate were lowered a good bit and all monetary transfers were included (capital gains, imports and exports, and income), I think it would then be fair.

[Keller]

Found this in my daily tax readings. Haven't read the whole thing yet as I've got a final in 4 hours.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_shlaes&sid=aIOIqqEofwFU

[Hulkein]

Thought you were finished school? I have a Con Law II final today.

[Gan]

Interesting article. In the middle it talks about George Sr. having to raise taxes even after he said he wouldnt. And that inevitability, brought about by an ever increasing expectation of entitlements by our society, is one of the caveats of the fair tax plan. I'm currently reading Alan Greenspan's book and just started the section where he's working with George Sr. and his economic development team, I'm curious to see if Alan touches on some of the reasons behind George Sr's fiscal policy as it relates to the monetary policy of the times.

[Keller]

Thought you were finished school? I have a Con Law II final today.

3L. I don't know whether I am "done" or "finished" -- you'll understand next year. I now know why the adage goes, "First year they scare you to death. Second year they work you to death. And thrd year they bore you to death."

All I want to do is work (which I do, part-time, thankfully) and NOT be in school anymore. I don't care about Community Property or the Ethics of Dispute Resolution.

[Latrinsorm]

I don't care about... Ethics:(

[Gan]

Lawyers and ethics.

There's a funny story in there somewhere.

[Parkbandit]

Implement the FairTax, though, and the U.S. will find its tax-scape taking on a certain sleaziness. Vendors will materialize on street corners selling that DVD player without tax.

Even citizens who never thought of breaking the law will snatch up those DVDS. Thirty percent is simply too great a take to ignore. Especially vulnerable will be younger people, who already view property rights as an option, not a given. Think Napster -- if you don't pay for downloads, you certainly won't feel the need to pay a sales tax six times the one your state charges.

Here's my issue with the fair tax. It seems far too easy to circumvent.

[Keller]

Lawyers and ethics.

There's a funny story in there somewhere.

We're legally obligated to zealously represent our clients within the bounds of the law.

Which basically says we HAVE to act against our own personal ethics so long as there is not a law forbidding our action.

That, in sum, is the "ethics of dispute resolution". Now if I could only turn that into a 15-20 page paper, I'd be done with yet another class for the semester.

[Clove]

Here's my issue with the fair tax. It seems far too easy to circumvent.

Yes and no. See how long you get away with circumventing State sales tax on any significant scale. Now throw the Feds in.

Is it possible to evade? Yes. Is that a classic argument against high sales tax plans? Yes. Can it be controlled anyway? Absolutely. People always try to evade taxes.

This falls under the "some people will run stop signs, so why bother." argument.

[Parkbandit]

The more I read about this tax proposal, the more I like it.

[Clove]

I'd prefer a Value-Added Tax plan, but only because it would make more work for us accountant types. I doubt we'd be able to explain it to Congress.

A Federal Sales tax is almost as good. It taxes consumption, not production and encourages everyone to conserve and invest.

[crb]

unfortunately our economy is consumption driven. I would worry about what it could do to consumer spending.

But the tax income from illegals etc might offset that.

[Gan]

Add the tax income from illegal profits.

Only offset would be shortside from illegal purchases.

Talk about giving the black market concept a shot of steroids.

[Clove]

Yeah but the Feds are good with black markets. A Texas boy oughta know all about the ATF :D

[Gan]

Heh, I know both sides of that fence. ;)

[Clove]

Heh, I know both sides of that fence. ;)

And now the Texan is talking about fences...

[Parkbandit]

Talk about giving the black market concept a shot of steroids.

Things would have to definately be tightened down.... especially purchases across borders and on the internet.

But I have to think that the tax revenue from cash transactions, illegals and other people who are not currently paying taxes could offset the black market spending.

[Warriorbird]

Congress does not want to even further chill consumer spending.

[Clove]

It isn't likely to have a chilling effect, considering the consumers would have the full use of their income, instead of having a significant portion taken before they even have an opportunity to spend. Additionally, encourgaging savings and investments would have positive effects on the economy (reducing debt, building wealth and capital, etc.).

[Warriorbird]

People WANT the poor to spend money. To the average uneducated person...everything is going to have a much larger sales tax. More intelligent folks will find a whole new series of workarounds.

[CrystalTears]

So you're okay with the income taxes coming out of poor people's incomes, rather than letting them keep it all and allowing them that extra edge to save and/or pay for things they may want or need?

[Warriorbird]

I LIKE the Fair Tax. I am just pointing out why most Congress creatures are against it.

I also see its issues with realistic expectations of spending. The average poor person spends a lot more of their income just getting by.

[Clove]

I LIKE the Fair Tax. I am just pointing out why most Congress creatures are against it.

I also see its issues with realistic expectations of spending. The average poor person spends a lot more of their income just getting by.

"I spend 80% of my income so you gotta too because it's not fair!!11!!!1!!"

Can't talk about taxes without THAT cropping up. Thank-you for defining the difference between the poor and the rich again. Retaining extra cash is meaningless except in that it affords more security (for its potential to BE spent). Cash doesn't do anything for you, until it's traded for a good or service, so accumulate a pile of it if you like.

The rich spend more money than the poor, regardless of the proportion of their income spent and therefore would contribute more to the public coffers consistent with the economic advantage derived from their spending.

Congress will care about revenue and the revenue potential; and this has fantastic revenue potential.

[Warriorbird]

Then why are most of them against it?

Hmm...

[Clove]

Then why are most of them against it?

Hmm...

Because they're rich, bitch.

[Clove]

Watch how fast Congress would straighten out Social Security... if they had to collect it.

[Warriorbird]

:shrugs: I tend to think the Fair Tax is good for the rich. I consider it more "Fair" than arbitrary high income tax numbers.

[Parkbandit]

:shrugs: I tend to think the Fair Tax is good for the rich. I consider it more "Fair" than arbitrary high income tax numbers.

It probably is... but the rich are taking advantage of loopholes, off shore accounts, etc.. to circumvent current tax laws.

The only people this tax actually hurts are those in the cash business who don't report it. This tax would kill them, since they currently aren't reporting that income for taxes.

[Gigantuous]

In regards to the poor spending more "just to get by":

Included with the FairTax is a proposed monthly rebate check to deal with monthly recurring bills: rent, utilities, minimal groceries.

So you basically wouldn't be getting taxxed on "just getting by", which leaves you more monetary power to do with as you please, be it investing, saving, or buying luxury items.

[Drunken Durfin]

-=Pesudo Cross Post Warning=-

I highly suggest the Fair Tax book to anyone who has not read it. It states all of the issues, even the arguments against the proposed system, in a clear and easy to read way. Not only that, it gives a very good history of the tax system we currently have, how it was put in place and a lot of facts that most people don't know about.

http://www.amazon.com/FairTax-Book-S...4345702&sr=1-1

Even if you are totally against the concept, the book is very informative and might just change your mind. Personally I cannot say enough good about it, most of what you hear negative on the airwaves are from people who are misrepresenting the facts. Read the book, read the proposed legislation, make up your own mind.

Other Links:

Fair Tax Suppoters: www.fairtax.org

The "Fair Tax" Bill, HR25: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h25ih.txt.pdf

The Author of the bill:
http://linder.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Resources.Home&Resource_id=04E511FD-7D87-4F50-B551-5996F29A075B

[Warriorbird]

People naturally worry a bit about the government setting what "reasonable expenses" are.