1
   

President Bush's BOLD AGENDA

 
 
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 04:01 pm
Dear friends,

Can you imagine a day when the intimate details of our financial lives are no longer subject to the scrutiny of a faceless bureaucracy with an abysmal record of bungling inefficiency, inaccuracy and abuse of taxpayer rights? DARE TO DREAM! If HR 25 / S1493 becomes the law of the land, the abolition of the IRS will be a dream will come true. Some say this will never come to pass, but I believe there is reason for hope. Not only has the proposal been in the news a great deal, but Treasury Secretary Snow has said that in a Bush second term, Tax Reform will be "BOLD!" Please see: http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=a7CUqFGlG648&refer=top_world_news

Even though I have a lot invested in the study of this Rube Goldberg like device, there are a number of reasons why I support the sales tax proposal. First, a sales tax is really a return to the vision of the Founding Fathers who believed in taxes on consumption only. Please see Federalist Paper No. 21, found at http://federalistpatriot.us/fedpapers/fed_21.html. Second, recent retaliatory actions and rulings of the World Trade Organization would be nullified by the repeal of Title 26 and the concomitant imposition of a national sales tax. Because a sales tax is easily border adjusted, our goods would be better able to compete in the world market which would lead to rapid economic expansion---an expansion that should help ALL Americans. Third, The sales tax would be pay-as-you-go for virtually all, meaning that the vast majority of taxpayers would no longer be subject to audit, lien and levy of their private property in satisfaction of tax debt. This proposal would be a boon for private property rights and privacy rights. Fourth, this is the only plan which will solve the looming Social Security and Medicare crises.

Many have unfairly criticized this proposal. Rebuttals of recent criticisms can be found at: http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/smart/rebuttals.html. I feel I must address one of the oft repeated criticisms........that the sales tax will be REGRESSIVE. Let's be clear, the current proposal IS NOT REGRESSIVE, as many who are ignorant of the specifics of the bill suggest. In fact, when the net effect of all changes are considered, the current sales tax proposal is MORE PROGRESSIVE than our current system because the FairTax: 1. Prebates the sales tax charged on povertly level expenditures, 2. Removes the cost of embedded taxation from the price of goods by repealing the corporate tax, and 3. It eliminates the cruelly regressive payroll tax. The payroll tax is openly acknowledged by all to hit low income workers the hardest, yet critics of the sales tax plan conveniently omit the repeal of said from their "analysis," and many refuse to acknowledge what every armchair economist knows......corporations don't pay taxes, people do...often in the form of higher prices. A graph of the effective FairTax rates can be found at: http://www.pafairtax.org/resrcs/taxrates.pdf

We must act in concert if this is to become a reality. Please spread the word and help to dispel the popular myths about the sales tax. Please visit http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/opinion/elec_petition.html and sign the electronic petition. Please write to your Congressional Representative, Secretary Snow and the President. Let them know of your support for the bill and ask for their support of HR 25/S 1493, The Fair Tax Act of 2003. Additional information can be found at www.pafairtax.org. Please feel free to forward this e-mail to your friends. Together, we can make April 15th just another beautiful spring day!

Many Thanks.

[email protected]
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 893 • Replies: 11
No top replies

 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 05:21 pm
First, may I point out that your screen name seems somehow appropriate for this type of post.

Second, there are many reasons that the mis-named "fair" tax is unfair. Saying taxing corporations hurts low income workers more than a graduated tax system where lower income families pay a smaller percentage is beyond ridiculous.

Third, there are scant few people who support a flat income tax. This is a very extreme position. Most of us support a variation of the graduated income tax that is in place now.

I don't know why I wasted my time responding to this. There's five minutes I will never recover.
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Sep, 2004 05:24 pm
ebrown-- It wasn't a complete waste. I needed another laugh. I owe you five minutes.
0 Replies
 
chugalugalug
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Sep, 2004 02:07 pm
I don't think the wealthy are paying a proportionately higher rate with the so-called progressive income tax. Most wealthy people got that way the old fashioned way, they inherited it. They don't have enormous payroll income that would be subject to income tax. These trust fund babies get most of their income from investments generating income that is only subject to capital gains taxes, currently only 15%. This is less than the poor and middle class are paying.

Of course, there are some individuals making large incomes. The vast majority of these own their own businesses. And for these folks, there is no limit to the loopholes available to avoid taxes. Most of these people usem their business to generate business expenses to reduce their income. Take a look at the best selling book, "Inc. and Grow Rich". It explains how to deduct almost everything. In addition, the rich business owners have other favors given them by our generous Congress. One on the most egregious loopholes given to business owners is something called the 412i plan. Look it up. It allows business owners to put hundreds of thousands of pre-tax dollars into retirement investments.

No, I think the most regressive tax is the one we currently have. You see, the current system insures a person cannot "earn" themselves rich. The only way to get rich is by investments. But, the income tax insures that we can't keep enough of what we make to make substantial investments. If a middle class person is lucky enough to get a higher paying job, the higher income tax hit will take it before they can invest it. It is a trap.

I think what most of us want is a simple system that the rich can't beat. I think that the rich will pay far more taxes with the sales tax than they do now. We want a system that is fair. Maybe it's not perfect, but the sales tax seems more fair than what we have now. We want something simple that does not require a bureaucracy to administer and cannot be manipulated by special interests. The sales tax accomplishes that.

Is it perfect? No. But it's so much better than the mess we have now. The poor are virtually untaxed. The rich will pay no matter what favors they court with politicians. And, finally, the middle-class will have an opportunity to save and invest far more dollars than they can now. If they have the self-discipline, they can rise above the class they're trapped in now.

Is that so bad?
0 Replies
 
padmasambava
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Sep, 2004 02:16 pm
E Brown is right, this post is unworthy of a response.

It will never make it past the circular file much less to the floor.
0 Replies
 
chugalugalug
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Oct, 2004 10:23 am
Here's a very COMMON MISCONCEPTION:

I have talked to a few people about the Fair Tax and when I
mention the taxes embedded in products that will go away, thus
reducing the prices of products, I hear things like, "Yeah, right.
Their taxes may go down but there's no way companies will pass the
savings on to the consumer who is already used to paying the higher
price."


In a market where there is no barrier to entry, when a firm or a
group of firms make a [economic] profit that goes beyond the normal
operating cost (normal profit which includes salaries, dividends,
etc.), it creates incentive for other firms to enter the market.

All things being equal, the demand for the product being constant,
larger the number of new firms entering the market, lower the prices
that can be charged by the new firms (assuming no product
differentiation). If the newer firms are offering less for the same
product, older firms already in the market need to lower their
prices accordingly or it will lose market share.

One more thing ---- price gouging is actually a positive thing since
it creates stimulus for other firms to enter the market to take
advantage of the large profit (price gouging). But larger the
number of new firms entering the market, lower the long term prices,
and larger the supply.

People who doesn't understand economics think that price gouging in
vaccines or oil was wrong, when in fact, that was the best thing to
happen because if it was allowed to continue, supply would have
increased.

Here's a simple intuitive example. Suppose there was a disaster
which destroyed all the electrical circuits in your area, and
there's only one electrician in town. There would be large demand
for his services, which would drive his hourly wages up. If the
incident was isolated to this particular area and electricians in
other town realized that they could make several times more offering
services at one-electrician-only town, they would start offering
services there (from nearby town), driving up the supply of
available electricians. In the long term, prices would drop and
equalize at normal equilibrium.
0 Replies
 
chugalugalug
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Oct, 2004 12:03 pm
Read these articles:

http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/news/editorial/9966136.htm

http://www.columbiatribune.com/2004/Oct/20041019News007.asp



http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg1808.cfm



http://www.lincolncourier.com/news/04/10/18/a.asp



http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/elections/orl-locmaxwell19101904oct19,0,6583698.column?coll=orl-home-headlines



http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~150~2476629,00.html



http://www.pantagraph.com/stories/101904/opi_20041019001.shtml



http://springfield.news-leader.com/news/today/1019-Collaborat-204882.html



http://www.2theadvocate.com/stories/101904/new_national001.shtml



http://www.fortmorgantimes.com/Stories/0,1413,164~8312~2476557,00.html



http://www.northfulton.com/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=%7BCCD78D45-D677-4EEA-951C-75028921DF98%7D



http://www.swtimes.com/archive/2004/October/17/opinion/sat_letters.html



http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/special_packages/election2004/9951929.htm



http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/specialnews/election/119.htm



http://www.thecentralgeorgian.com/politics006.html



http://www.nbc5i.com/politics/3829370/detail.html



http://www.whig.com/286442958888713.php



http://www.aiada.org/article.asp?id=25450&cat=Politics



http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/special_packages/election2004/9949926.htm



http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/9946864.htm



http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/myrtlebeachonline/9947530.htm



http://washingtontimes.com/national/20041018-124849-5560r.htm



http://www.starbanner.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041017/ZNYT01/410170303/1009/BUSINESS



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40620-2004Oct17.html



http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1004/181071.html



http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1004/181071.html



http://www.citizen-times.com/cache/article/editorial/63390.shtml



http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031778576301



http://www.2theadvocate.com/stories/101604/new_standout001.shtml



http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/rn20041016.shtml



http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/5035563.html



http://www.thetandd.com/articles/2004/10/15/news/doc41707ebf59f2b427704385.txt



http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_comment/gessing200410150832.asp



http://www.fox21.com/Global/story.asp?S=2429734&nav=2KPpRzbZ
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Oct, 2004 12:10 pm
CHug,

Stop this pointless multiple posting.

Please.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Oct, 2004 12:13 pm
I live in a state that has a sales tax and no income tax. It's an absurd way to run a gov't, but we'll never change it. But talk about regressive...
0 Replies
 
chugalugalug
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Oct, 2004 01:16 pm
0 Replies
 
Einherjar
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2004 10:05 am
One copy, one paste chug, this multiple posting is annoying, and nobody reads your posts more than once anyway.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Oct, 2004 10:46 am
padmasambava wrote:
E Brown is right, this post is unworthy of a response.

It will never make it past the circular file much less to the floor.


And yet you felt compelled to respond. Curious.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » President Bush's BOLD AGENDA
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/30/2024 at 03:49:53