www.fairtax.orgNo taxes > no military > welcome Japan or even Mexico!
www.fairtax.orgNo taxes > no military > welcome Japan or even Mexico!
The Rich dont spent money, they scurry it away in investments or under a mattress, and thanks the the Bush Administration reduction on Capital Gains that money is only minimally taxed.
So if we do away with the income tax (which is fair because everyone pays based on their ability to pay, ergo: the poor pay less the rich pay more) and institute a Retail Sales Tax the real losers will be the poor and middle class as they will be paying more taxes at the register. The Rich will pay little to no tax at all.
This is a bad, bad, idea.
Not strictly true as the rich still eat and food costs money, the reality is that technically a Goods and Services Tax is fair but it places the poor in an undesirable position.
There is nothing fair about systems based on peoples ability to pay, it is in fact pretty close to arguing that it is only worth robbing banks because they have all the money, I am a far greater fan of flat tax rates where everyone a certain percentage whether they earn one dollar or 100,000,000 dollars if you want to help out the poor you then you exempt the first 10,000 dollars (or what ever number you come up with).
I am also very opposed to progressive tax systems as they penalise people for doing well and that is counter productive.
The Rich have basic costs. But the point I am making is that they are NOT the ones that are turning th economy, their purchasing power contribution is too small, because there are fewer of them to make a difference on the national economy. People who make more than $1.6 Million only represent 1% of the population.
I strongly disagree. I think its absolutely fair to require people who make more to contribute more. The reason is as followed, the USA does alot of things to facilitate the making of big money. Its very, vary rare situation that someone can say they did it on their own, whether it was public school, a scholorship, a low interest government loan, a tax cut, a tax break, you name it somewhere the government has been there to help people on the road to financial success. Therefore requiring the wealthy to pay back into society, to allow others the same chance to succeed is more than fair.
The Fair Tax ends personal & Coporate taxes. Corporations don't pay taxes, they are an expense that is passed on to the consumer, ask any accountant. So...the 300$ computer before the F.T. will still be 300$ after the price decliners by apx 23% as the hidden tax is removed from the price. F.T. includes a prebate equivelent to the amount of tax payed out by subsistance level food expenditures. This would effectivly make the very poor tax free. Everyone else would pay according to his spending, sounds fair to me. One Law taxes away 37% of all funds repatriate baack to the US by foriegn subsidieries. Elimination of this would mean trillions of $ back home helping out the US economy instead of other countries economies. Get the Lender/Boortz book on the subject, does a great job explaining the concept.
If there has to be an income tax a flat tax is fair, progressive tax rate is unfair, & punishes acomplishments.
Buffet seems to be suffering from "Rich man's guilt".
The Fair Tax ends personal & Coporate taxes. Corporations don't pay taxes, they are an expense that is passed on to the consumer, ask any accountant. So...the 300$ computer before the F.T. will still be 300$ after the price decliners by apx 23% as the hidden tax is removed from the price. F.T. includes a prebate equivelent to the amount of tax payed out by subsistance level food expenditures. This would effectivly make the very poor tax free. Everyone else would pay according to his spending, sounds fair to me. One Law taxes away 37% of all funds repatriate baack to the US by foriegn subsidieries. Elimination of this would mean trillions of $ back home helping out the US economy instead of other countries economies. Get the Lender/Boortz book on the subject, does a great job explaining the concept.
If there has to be an income tax a flat tax is fair, progressive tax rate is unfair, & punishes acomplishments.
Buffet seems to be suffering from "Rich man's guilt".
The F.T. is set up to be revenue neutral. Same total take, just in a fairer to everybody way. Boortz, half of the book team is a Libertarian radio talk show host. Lots of people call trying to down the F.T., he makes short work of them with logical answers. Being able to hear him answer questions is a real help on understanding the F.T. No doubt there will be a period of adjusment while the urge to keep the extra revenue clashes with the competitive spirit. Boortz.com is his site. A huge reaserch effort went into the project, he has said how much & how many intellectual types were involved, but I've forgotten the numbers. It would not only help US companies, but would make the US more attractive a host for foriegn ones as well.Again, and sorry if I come over as offenisve - it is not straightforwardly intented - (I am diplomatically challenged, got that in writing): Could I get some of that stuff, please?
If I read you right, you think that if corporate taxes are nilled (actually the bigguns dont pay any anyway), you as the "little" man on the street are going to pay less in the end? I would think if there is less money to come in, the cost will be distributed or cancelled, simple maths, methinks-
Let´s see, last time I looked someone has to pay all that stuff like roads, schools, public swimming pools, politician/hero praising statues, tanks, F-22s, nuclear submarines, water filtration, environmental agencies, our beloved functionaries, etc...???
Care to comment?
Rattler
Not strictly true as the rich still eat and food costs money, the reality is that technically a Goods and Services Tax is fair but it places the poor in an undesirable position.
There is nothing fair about systems based on peoples ability to pay, it is in fact pretty close to arguing that it is only worth robbing banks because they have all the money, I am a far greater fan of flat tax rates where everyone a certain percentage whether they earn one dollar or 100,000,000 dollars if you want to help out the poor you then you exempt the first 10,000 dollars (or what ever number you come up with).
I am also very opposed to progressive tax systems as they penalise people for doing well and that is counter productive.
The first paragraph makes a good point, a sales tax is simply a stealthy way of making the rich richer and the poor poorer. However, it the remainder seems to assume that earnings are deserved, this is quite a radical suggestion considering this is the era of large city bonuses and rewards for taking unacceptable short term risks that bankrupt the economies of the world.
However, this is fundamentally wrong since it assumes people earn what they deserve. A small businessman might sweat his guts off and work until the small hours for little gain, whilst someone who has chanced upon a decent business model or even inherited it from their parents, can earn millions whilst relaxing in a yacht somewhere. I doubt if there is little relation between business success and effort for those with the right connections and access to credit, essentially a member of the club.
Read Fooled by Randomness, by Nicholas Taleb. He is an exception in the business world, a clever man who has earned his position by ability rather than luck, which seems to be a reoccurring theme in his book.
http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/
It does not assume that people earn what they deserve at all, it assumes that people will earn what the market will pay for that particular job and it also accepts that people are promoted to their level of incompetence.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.