What do you think of this Fair Tax proposal?

[Pabst]

There's no easy answers. I'm no fan of income tax because I think a working mans wages are sacrosanct. If one is doing God's toil he should render very little to Caesar.

On the other hand I agree (gasp!!!) with dddooo. Consumption taxes are regressive and beyond that happaboy, the implementation will be chock full of the type of mandating and conditions that us conservatives loathe. Can you imagine the over lobbied, arbitrary, BULLSHIT in Congressional decisions on what should be taxed and at what rate. Hell I even disagree with the premise. Who's call is it, that saving is preferable to consumption? As is, one pays the States anywhere from 5-10% in sales tax.

I see no reason to not have an estate tax of around 30% on anything over two mil, and a capital gains tax of 25%. Most capital appreciation is due to governmental policies that debase currencies and cause inflation. Thus increases in capital generally ARE Caesar's domain.

 

[dddooo]

Quote from hapaboy:

Again, your argument is directed toward where the tax revenue goes. This is about how revenue is collected. If you don't like the fact that your taxes go to the war in Iraq, you should write your Congressman.

Oh please, stop pretending you don't understand what I am talking about just because you don't have a good answer. What is unfair is that I have to foot a bigger share of government expenditures than you not because I use more government services but because I spend more money on food/clothing/electronics. Whether we agree or disagree with these expenditures is totally irrelevant.

You may be using 10 times more government services than I do but if I bought 2 plazma TVs and you only bought one I am paying for the services you use. What's fair about that?

 

[kjkent1]

Here's a different idea. How about we amend the Constitution to require that only the People can appropriate spending in a particular area. That is, Congress enacts a bill that authorizes spending, and instead of the President having to appropriate it, the People must do it by majority rule.

So, for example, Congress wants to authorize 10 billion for border security, then it would be up to the individual taxpayers to go to a website and click on a yes/no to appropriate funds.

This way, the People would be voting for what they wanted their tax money spent on, and if they vote no, then taxes would decline because the debt would decrease. If they vote yes enough, then taxes would increase.

We have the technology...maybe we should start using it.

In any event, no flat tax or consumption tax will be worth a damn unless we simultaneously repeal the 16th Amendment, so as to prevent taxation based on income. Otherwise, the government will be free to institute both income and consumption taxes, and eventually, whatever government can do -- it will do.

 

[jem]

Quote from Pabst:

There's no easy answers. I'm no fan of income tax because I think a working mans wages are sacrosanct. If one is doing God's toil he should render very little to Caesar.

On the other hand I agree (gasp!!!) with dddooo. Consumption taxes are regressive and beyond that happaboy, the implementation will be chock full of the type of mandating and conditions that us conservatives loathe. Can you imagine the over lobbied, arbitrary, BULLSHIT in Congressional decisions on what should be taxed and at what rate. Hell I even disagree with the premise. Who's call is it, that saving is preferable to consumption? As is, one pays the States anywhere from 5-10% in sales tax.

I see no reason to not have an estate tax of around 30% on anything over two mil, and a capital gains tax of 25%. Most capital appreciation is due to governmental policies that debase currencies and cause inflation. Thus increases in capital generally ARE Caesar's domain.

Yes but do we want to encourage the govt to debase the currency to raise revenues.

I say we take a cue from hoover. Drop the income tax and raise tariffs. By the way it is arguable that income tax is a theft of property and tariffs were the intended way to raise money to defend the country. Boy would that turn the tables on the people buying our bonds buying our currency and flooding our country with artifically low prices. I wonder how the markets would react?

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

The clergy does God's toil, and they aren't taxed.

Everyone else is working for Caesar....

Quote from Pabst:

There's no easy answers. I'm no fan of income tax because I think a working mans wages are sacrosanct. If one is doing God's toil he should render very little to Caesar.

On the other hand I agree (gasp!!!) with dddooo. Consumption taxes are regressive and beyond that happaboy, the implementation will be chock full of the type of mandating and conditions that us conservatives loathe. Can you imagine the over lobbied, arbitrary, BULLSHIT in Congressional decisions on what should be taxed and at what rate. Hell I even disagree with the premise. Who's call is it, that saving is preferable to consumption? As is, one pays the States anywhere from 5-10% in sales tax.

I see no reason to not have an estate tax of around 30% on anything over two mil, and a capital gains tax of 25%. Most capital appreciation is due to governmental policies that debase currencies and cause inflation. Thus increases in capital generally ARE Caesar's domain.

 

[hapaboy]

Quote from dddooo:

Oh please, stop pretending you don't understand what I am talking about just because you don't have a good answer. What is unfair is that I have to foot a bigger share of government expenditures than you not because I use more government services but because I spend more money on food/clothing/electronics. Whether we agree or disagree with these expenditures is totally irrelevant.

You may be using 10 times more government services than I do but if I bought 2 plazma TVs and you only bought one I am paying for the services you use. What's fair about that?

Good grief, dddooo, stop pretending you know what you're talking about because you don't have a good response.

Present system: You make more, you pay more in taxes. Whether you save your net or spend it, you still pay more in taxes.

Fair Tax: You spend more, you pay more in taxes.

Get it?

By your logic above, the people who use the most government services - the poor, illegal immigrants - should be paying more than the billionaire down the block. Yeah, that'll really fly.

Taxing the hell out of the poor - are you sure you're a Lib?

Still waiting to hear how the proposal will destroy our consumer-driven economy.....

 

[hapaboy]

Quote from kjkent1:

In any event, no flat tax or consumption tax will be worth a damn unless we simultaneously repeal the 16th Amendment, so as to prevent taxation based on income. Otherwise, the government will be free to institute both income and consumption taxes, and eventually, whatever government can do -- it will do.

That's exactly what the Fair Tax does - repeals the 16th Amendment.

Bye-bye IRS.

 

[dddooo]

Quote from hapaboy:

Fair Tax: You spend more, you pay more in taxes.

Oh I see, if you buy a second plazma TV then you also have to pay more for Katrina, Iraq, Nasa and Medicare bill. You're on welfare and medicaid, you file ten frivolous lawsuits but if you don't buy a second plazma TV you don't have to pay a penny for it. Fair tax in action, if that's not fair I don't what is. LOL, Hapa, you're losing it.

 

[Ricter]

Quote from Pabst:

There's no easy answers. I'm no fan of income tax because I think a working mans wages are sacrosanct. If one is doing God's toil he should render very little to Caesar.

There's very little God worthy work, as a percent of the total, being done these days.

 

[hapaboy]

Quote from dddooo:

Oh I see, if you buy a second plazma TV then you also have to pay more for Katrina, Iraq, Nasa and Medicare bill. You're on welfare and medicaid, you file ten frivolous lawsuits but if you don't buy a second plazma TV you don't have to pay a penny for it. Fair tax in action, if that's not fair I don't what is. LOL, Hapa, you're losing it.

So those on welfare and Medicare should be taxed more than you who can afford 2 plasmas?

Who's losing it?

Sure you're a lib, dddooo?

Still waiting for your explanation of how the proposal will "destroy our consumer-driven economy."......(crickets chirping)