Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It takes two people to cheat at a sales tax, it only takes one to cheat at income tax returns, I don't know how states have a problem collecting sales tax but you said it prove it.....
How is it not complete, I have read the complete legislation covers it all....
How is the tax income going to fall? There is a provision for raising and lowing the tax rate but if you would have read the legislation you would know that.....
You keep calling it regressive, tell me how it is regressive, prove your statement....
When you are a seller of a good, you have incentive to help buyer cheat. The fair tax act is not complete because it just dump the tax collection on the states without further explanation (am I wrong)? So states have to hire people to get the federal money? Who is going to enforce the penalty? States or the Federal government.
The current rate purposed is 23% for all sales. You can do a estimation and you will realize it requires 34% to maintain current federal government income. So you come up short first year, let the government borrowing more money.
How about I buy my LV bags over-sea, wait I evade fair tax...California has very serious problem of small business not paying their collected sales tax, and a lot states actually hired private contractors for the collection. You want to mix government with private collection agency, be my guest.
The tax is regressive because it tax everything. Yes, it has a coupon system. Guess what, you will need a new agency to give out the coupons. Maybe we can re-hire IRS to do the job. By the way, even with best estimation, you are still shifting tax burdens to the middle income because riches pay less even if they don't cheat.
Beck and O'Reilly don't tell me anything, I don't listen to either one.....
I actually read the proposed law, go figure, something you have obviously not done.....
It is not the same tax code of the 1890's....
The philosophy and the result are the same:
It's (again) about ratios, Tom.
Now the rate of taxation for everyone, from poor to people like Steve Forbes, Warren Buffett (the latter thinks the idea is insane, fyi) varies, because like the other poster says, the plan has numerous versions, AND is not even a plan, but a broad outline, but lest's assume that everyone gets dinged 15%- with zero deductions:
What is 15% of $35,000 (more or less the average American wage (not income, as that is a stat which is skewed away from the typical)?
How is that wage-earner and family affected?
What is 15% of $2,000,000,000, or even $2,000,000?
How is that person and family affected?
Look up 'regressive' vs 'progressive' taxation for the general answer if you would rather not do the math.
Tom, ya gotta read more- and not just the rightie stuff.
3,000,000 seniors depend primarily- if not exclusively- on SS. Take it away and they have NOTHING.
Hence, poverty.
In fact, you don't even seem to read ALL the Rightie stuff:
Paul Ryan, a Janesville Republican who is in a safe, gerrymandered district has proposed major changes for SS for EVERYONE under the age of 55.
Chile- the nation- privatized their retirement system in the late 90''s as a result of a trade agreement with US, and when their speculative economy collapsed, most people lost 60% of their funds which, like ours, they had paid into the system.
The 40% figure, though, is based on the decline of our Stock market HAD Bush II's plan to privatize SS (don't think this is a new Teahead idea, do you?) had passed Congress.
YOU need to read more, noone has ever said anything about taking it away from them, it will be phased in so as not to affect anyone who is currently on SS.
The stock market has come back up to nearly 80% of where it was and if you have ever read anything about finantial planning you would know that 90% of all 5 year periods have increase and 100% of all 10 year periods......
Now the rate of taxation for everyone, from poor to people like Steve Forbes, Warren Buffett (the latter thinks the idea is insane, fyi) varies, because like the other poster says, the plan has numerous versions, AND is not even a plan, but a broad outline, but lest's assume that everyone gets dinged 15%- with zero deductions:
What is 15% of $35,000 (more or less the average American wage (not income, as that is a stat which is skewed away from the typical)?
How is that wage-earner and family affected?
What is 15% of $2,000,000,000, or even $2,000,000?
How is that person and family affected?
Look up 'regressive' vs 'progressive' taxation for the general answer if you would rather not do the math.
Your example proves that you have not read "The Fair Tax". What you are discussing is the Flat tax not "The Fair Tax" two totally different plans....
"The Fair Tax" is actually a bill in Congress, HR.25.IH, that has been proposed for several years.....
YOU need to read more, noone has ever said anything about taking it away from them, it will be phased in so as not to affect anyone who is currently on SS.
The stock market has come back up to nearly 80% of where it was and if you have ever read anything about finantial planning you would know that 90% of all 5 year periods have increase and 100% of all 10 year periods......
Tom,
The stock market has rebounded based on the DJ 100, which is NOT indicitave of the broader market.
Besides, most of the investors who fled the market after losing everyting have not returned because............. They Lost Everything!
Only ther fat cats/institutional players are in it now, don't you ever watch CNBC??
Social Security is a system based on the FICA tax that EVERYONE pays into.
Social Security is a promise between generations, so I'm just as concerned about what these wingnuts are gonna do to my sons (in their 30's), as I am about what they're gonna do to my inlaws (in their 70's).
It is also the reason why-since the 1940's- old age has not mean destitution in this country, as it meant before SS.
You-going off memory- have been told by the media, which can lie (I'll post the case if you want) that SS is broke.
Rubbish!
SS was first raided under Ronal Reagan to cover-up the fact 'Trickle Down' had not worked; other Admin's (Bush I, II; Clinton) also put in IOU's, but those IOU's are good, and the money is there:
I can also post that data if you want.
So, in the end this is just about mis-info - corporate propaganda- which you take at face value without ever investigating.
Tom,
The stock market has rebounded based on the DJ 100, which is NOT indicitave of the broader market.
Besides, most of the investors who fled the market after losing everyting have not returned because............. They Lost Everything!
Only ther fat cats/institutional players are in it now, don't you ever watch CNBC??
Social Security is a system based on the FICA tax that EVERYONE pays into.
Social Security is a promise between generations, so I'm just as concerned about what these wingnuts are gonna do to my sons (in their 30's), as I am about what they're gonna do to my inlaws (in their 70's).
It is also the reason why-since the 1940's- old age has not mean destitution in this country, as it meant before SS.
You-going off memory- have been told by the media, which can lie (i'll post the case if you want) that SS is broke.
Rubbish!
SS was first raided under Ronal Reagan to cover-up the fact 'Tricke Down' had not worked; other Admin's (Bush I II; Clinton) also put in IOU's, but those IOU's are good, and the money is there:
I can also post that data if you want.
So, in the end this is just about mis-info - corporate propaganda- which you take at face value without ever investigating.
Or so it would seem, based on your posts.
And why is that?
I am still in the market, I am not a fat cat, as are most people who have 401Ks and other personal investments.....
Can you show me where someone lost everything in the market?
SS was raided long before RR, the SS surplus has been around nearly since it's inception and all of that money has gone into the general fund for the corupt congres' to spend for their pet projects to buy votes....
"The Trust Fund will gradually be drawn upon to cover the difference between tax receipts and benefit payments. It will be completely depleted by 2042 (according to the Social Security Administration) or 2052 (according to the Congressional Budget Office). However, if the US economy performs better than the economic assumptions and projections used by the SSA and CBO, the trust funds may remain in surplus indefinitely."
May remain sovent, do you want to bet your children's future on a maybe?
You read the outline and from that you can tell that it is regressive?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
