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.
The good th9ng about it is those that buy mopre would pay more and it would eliminate the huge number of peole that don't claim income that would pay for the deficit.It also would el;iminate those on welfare that buy luxuries from not paying tax has there could be exemptions for food and thenecessities of life.
You're spelling is so bad I can't understand what the heck you're trying to say. I'm not one to usually criticize spelling.
Instead of dragging this thread off topic, it might be a little more constructive to start a new thread debating the various reasons your 'poll tax' is unconstitutional.
This thread is supposed to be about the merits of the 'fair tax'.
Sterlinggirl, is this just a debate about how wonderful it would be to have a national sales tax? Such a discussion would not be a debate; it would be gathering of the faithful. A true debate focuses on both the benefits and disadvantages of a proposition.
I am against the mis-named "Fair Tax" because, like all sales taxes, it is a regressive tax. I am against regressive taxation.
I brought up the concept of a 'poll tax' because it is even more regressive than a national sales tax. It's a debating method known as reductio ad absurdum: one assumes the claim of his debate opponent and then shows how it leads to a ridiculous outcome; if the outcome is absurd, then the original premise must be wrong.
In this case of reductio ad absurdum, I stated that the "fairest" tax was a poll tax, specifically because people with children were getting "tax breaks" -- it wasn't fair that an infant (or his or her parents) doesn't pay its fair share of federal taxes.
Of course to people like
Quote:
Originally Posted by irspow
Sounds like my "Citizens Fee". I like it!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinegaroon
I agree with many of your points, especially regarding families. We don't need more population, so why should people without children have to support those that do? Why should you get a tax break for having dependents?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish
A per capita tax would certainly be the most fair tax, kind of like "one man, one vote." It just won't happen.
a poll tax sounds agreeable, perhaps even better than a national sales tax.
And I promise that if I see you drowning I'd throw you a rope and pull you to safety.
See the difference? Or did you tear out the parable of the Good Samaritan from your bible?
Jesus still gets it. When will you?
So, the Word of God issues directly from your lips?
I only profess that I believe that The Fair Tax is better than what we have now.
I won't compete with such a conceit as one must possess who repetitively apparently proclaims himself to be the Arbiter and Magistrate of the Will and Wisdom of the Lord. I won't even attempt to refute the assumption of that lofty mantle.
It probably helps to be a little nutty to complete a proper series of rants, I suppose.
I see your contention that you would pull me to safety. I worry about what that safety may be, recognizing that you never said you wouldn't throw me an anchor.
I only profess that I believe that The Fair Tax is better than what we have now.
I agree. If you don't like a sales tax, you have the option to buy things secondhand and learn to do things for yourself so you don't have to pay it. In that regard, the tax is very fair.
A poll tax makes everyone pay, and if you read back through the thread you won't find a mention of providing children a franchise to vote in exchange for their tax duty. Is that fair?
I would be for it but my opinion is that most Americans would think it's a rip-off. We would rather pay "hidden taxes" than see it up front.
I think we already have "real" percentage of the money pay in taxes hidden. If you add cost of Tax companies add to products, sales tax, property tax, income tax, etc you will you pay a whole lot of $$$$ to government.
I think we already have "real" percentage of the money pay in taxes hidden. If you add cost of Tax companies add to products, sales tax, property tax, income tax, etc you will you pay a whole lot of $$$$ to government.
Yeah ... the percentage would be steep. I'm taking an income tax class right now and read that if we do have a national sales tax, the percentage would be in the range of 27%!
So, the Word of God issues directly from your lips?
I only profess that I believe that The Fair Tax is better than what we have now.
I won't compete with such a conceit as one must possess who repetitively apparently proclaims himself to be the Arbiter and Magistrate of the Will and Wisdom of the Lord. I won't even attempt to refute the assumption of that lofty mantle.
Nope.
Only quoted Jesus to support my contention that any regressive sales tax is unfair to those at the lower end of the economic scale. Sort of like I quoted Oliver Wendel Holmes about the benefits of paying taxes.
Heck, I'm not even a Christian anymore. People like you cured me of that affliction a long time ago. I find myself agreeing with Gandhi.
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.
