G
gdalton said:Apparently mr. Mikkel has neglected his research into this plan so I will just ignore his input untill he does.
: said:Americans for Fair Tax
Simply put, the FairTax replaces the way we're currently taxed - based on our annual income - with a tax on goods and services. The FairTax is a voluntary “consumption" tax: the more you buy, the more you pay in taxes, the less you buy, the less you pay in taxes.
It's simple.
Everyone pays their fair share of taxes, and with the FairTax rebate, spending up to the poverty level is tax free. The Federal government is fully funded, including Social Security and Medicare, and you don't need an expert to determine your Federal taxes.
It's simple.
gdalton said:If you haven't heard to much about this please check out http://www.fairtax.org/ also http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=112782,00.html#estate_max_rate_2003 (thanks Indiconservitive)
I am personally for it but I do have concerns regarding inflation, when everyone starts getting 100% of their pay check and a pre-bate from the government every month then the market will be flooded with new cash which is of course cause for inflation. Now I do not know much about economics, to be honest it confuses the hell out of me and I'm a numbers guy, so any information regarding the cause and effect of inflation along with an explanation of how the Fairtax plan would or would not cause it would be great.
: said:Amercans for Fair Tax"If you were in a 23-percent income tax bracket, the federal government would take $23 out of your paycheck for every $100 you made. With the FairTax, if the federal government gets $23 out of every $100 spent in America, the same total revenue is delivered to the federal government. This is revenue neutrality. So, instead of paycheck-earning Americans paying 7.65 percent of their paychecks in Social Security/Medicare payroll taxes, plus an average of 18 percent of their paychecks in federal income tax, for a total of about 25.65 percent, consumers in America pay only $23 out of every $100. Or about 30 percent at the cash register when they elect to spend on new goods or services for their own personal consumption. And this tax is collected only on spending above the federal poverty level, providing important progressivity. "
Dezaad said:This will tend to decrease inflationary pressure, if not reverse it, causing deflation. Deflation would be scary
Um isn't deflation defined as a lowering in the price of goods?
herrwolf said:Dezaad said:This will tend to decrease inflationary pressure, if not reverse it, causing deflation. Deflation would be scary
Um isn't deflation defined as a lowering in the price of goods?
I think some backwater bumpkins have crawled out from the Appalachians and are trying their hand at social science. Ambitious.herrwolf said:I think that one major point missed by many of you arm chair scholars is the complex tax structure that the rich have manipulated to their benefit and, the enormous cost of the IRS. I for one am willing to try a new system.
By the way can you people name an example were deflation has occured on a national level?
Dezaad said:Um, yeah. Sounds great doesn't it? We could have deflation if the government, through the Federal Reserve, caused one...
How dare them deprive us of the lower prices we deserve...
Do tell how the Government through the Federal Reserve could cause one.
Also,
Who are you to say that the government shoud dictate prices? Competition should be the one(s) to dictate prices. In my observations anytime government gets involved prices usually get screwed up. The less government (reverting back to my original post, ie. less IRS makes Fairtax good) we have, the better off we will all be.
As far as an economics lesson do tell me what internet sites your visiting so I can be as smart as you!
I am not the one who says that government should 'dictate prices'. Actually they don't dictate prices. They can influence general price trends. The government, through the Federal Reserve, has influenced this, along with business investment and unemployment/employment levels. They do this by restricting and loosening the money supply.herrwolf said:Dezaad said:Um, yeah. Sounds great doesn't it? We could have deflation if the government, through the Federal Reserve, caused one...
How dare them deprive us of the lower prices we deserve...
Do tell how the Government through the Federal Reserve could cause one.
Also,
Who are you to say that the government should dictate prices?
This is naive. Competition is good at determining RELATIVE prices. That is, the price of goods as compared to other goods. However, leaving general price trends under the forces of the market leads to free market failures, and a lot of poor people. You have alot of faith in the free market, but you do not understand it. For the most part, free market forces create good things for everyone, so your faith is well placed. But, the free market does fail, in the sense that it works against the general welfare, and deflations are market failures in at least this sense. This has been identified through the science of economics and is corrected for by no other force than government intervention.Competition should be the one(s) to dictate prices. In my observations anytime government gets involved prices usually get screwed up. The less government (reverting back to my original post, ie. less IRS makes Fairtax good) we have, the better off we will all be.
Lesson complete, even though I said I wouldn't give one. Despite your sarcasm arising from your lack of knowledge, I will answer this, and even be fairly nice about it: If I needed to go to web sites to know and understand these things, I'd gladly give them to you. I really do already know these things from my education. I've also already looked up some sites specifically for you and put them in my last post. I don't know of any basic economic sites, but I am sure you could find them using google. That would be a good place to start, and then start reading books on economics to bring yourself up to speed. Good luck to you on that.As far as an economics lesson do tell me what internet sites your visiting so I can be as smart as you!
Half of what you say is pure jiber jaber. Or to try and sound smart, sophistic. First define rich, second when are the poor better off then the rich?Deflation is ironically harder on the poor than on the wealthy.
Science is pure speculation? What do you rely on for information that approaches objectivity?herrwolf said:Well your arguement is structured in a way that makes me believe your happy with the way things are! I'm not happy with the way things are. Economics your right is a science, that is why all this is pure speculation. Some theorists will even say we are all being manipulated.
You really are not happy with your ignorance are you? Do you have to make it so obvious though? Your unhappiness with the state of your education, not your ignorance, I mean. If you took the time to understand some things, you might find that you are less insecure, especially alongside some affirmation and visualization self-help work. That's my suggestion.Half of what you say is pure jiber jaber. Or to try and sound smart, sophistic.
You get a general feeling from what I'm saying, but don't really understand what's being said, much less the links I gave you? You're not related to a certain someone who shall remain nameless but he lives in the White House, are you? Just wondering, sometimes the look on his face makes me think he is just like that.First define rich, second when are the poor better off then the rich?
Where in the world did you get the idea that I wanted to make everyone financially equal? Ok, well, yes, I do, so it was a good guess. But, not right now. Furthermore, everything I have said here recognizes that it is necessary for the general welfare for there to be rich people, a robust and stable free market, progressive taxation, and attempts to level opportunity in the free market. Yes, I wish people would just enthusiastically work for nothing, and still be able to be provided for equally and comfortably. But, we all (pretty much) know where that leads, except on Star Trek.If you made everyone equal tomorrow in a month there would be rich and there would be poor. You can't legislate common sense or business sense.
You really are not happy with your ignorance are you? Do you have to make it so obvious though? Your unhappiness with the state of your education, not your ignorance, I mean. If you took the time to understand some things, you might find that you are less insecure, especially alongside some affirmation and visualization self-help work. That's my suggestion.
Science is pure speculation? What do you rely on for information that approaches objectivity?
Serious. What do you define as rich?First define rich
Yes. "Ad Hominem".herrwolf said:Can we say ad hominem?
What is "Um" meant to convey here?herrwolf said:Um isn't deflation defined as a lowering in the price of goods?
What is "Arm Chair Scolars" meant to convey here?herrwolf said:by many of you arm chair scholars
To which I responded, which is equally ad hominem:herrwolf said:... Or to try and sound smart, sophistic (directed at Dezaad)
You really are not happy with your ignorance are you? Do you have to make it so obvious though? Your unhappiness with the state of your education, not your ignorance, I mean. If you took the time to understand some things, you might find that you are less insecure, especially alongside some affirmation and visualization self-help work. That's my suggestion.
You are not responding here within the context of the issue you originally asserted, which was that economics is a science, and thus mere speculation. If you have conceded that the science of economics is not mere speculation, then I am satisfied in that regard.herrwolf said:Certainly not one event in history that you refer to (the great depression) without reviewing all the facts. If there is deflation under this sort of system how far would it go? You've got it in your mind that we will be back in Hoovervilles. You can articulate all you want that this plan stinks but you'll have to convince me that just because there was deflation in the 30's there will be deflation post-fairtax. Hardly a trend. Things are a lot different now, people invest more than before, we are more educated than ever, I just don't see the doom and gloom of it all.
Look at states in this fair union whose revenue is collected mostly by a sales tax.
Morris Minor said:I've read the book and am pretty well convinced it's a good idea. I am particularly concerned at the number of disincentives currently in place for doing business in the USA. US corporations are certainly at a disadvantage compared to competitors elsewhere in the 1st world. This is because there is a large embedded tax component in all products & services we try to sell overseas. Even countries that use the horrible VAT do not levy it on their exports. Buy a Cadillac in Germany - you are paying General Motors' corporate income tax. Buy a BMW in the USA - you do not pay their VAT.
I've never seen the point in taxing corporations - it's only purpose is to veil income taxes from individuals.
Quote:Indiconservative: All items cars to cereal have a 20% to 25% tax built into them now . So it wouldn't change the price much or maybe not at all.
Iriemon: So you add a 25% tax, and the price doesn't change. I'm going to have to look a little more closely at how this magic is accomplished
Indiconservative: A corporation pays income taxes. They pass those income taxes to you the consumer through there goods. Its estimated that the taxes they pass on to you through there products is between 20%-25%. So if they no longer have to pay income taxes through the fair tax the will remove the 20%-25% from the price of the goods and it will be replaced by the federal sales tax.
I'm anticipating you saying "What will stop them from keeping the price the same and then adding the tax on to it?"
Its the free market system where you can choose to buy products from people who are honest. If the ones that are not honest don't change they will be run out of business. I'm sure the people pushing this legislation would be smart to keep an eye on who is and isn't adjusting there prices
Morris Minor said:Value Added Tax (GST in Canada) is a sales tax levied on the sale of goods & services & it is collected by businesses. Unlike the FairTax, it is levied on tranactions at every stage of economic production in the supply chain. However businesses can offset the VAT they pay to suppliers on materials against the VAT they collect from customers further down the chain - - until you get to the end consumers, who end up paying the tax. Obviously the costs of collection & compliance are passed down the line to the consumers.
The Fairtax is levied only once, at the retail sales level. One advantage is that it is extremely inexpensive to collect - especially since the sales tax mechanism is already in place in many states. The proposal includes provision for the Feds to pay the States a collection fee of 0.25% for their trouble.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?