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.
My biggest negative on Johnson is the idea of the FairTax being the solution to our tax system. It's just rich welfare. Most of the rich wont actually spend enough to get taxed at 23% of their income. In reality it would be us paying more. Skin in the game my ass.
My biggest negative on Johnson is the idea of the FairTax being the solution to our tax system. It's just rich welfare. Most of the rich wont actually spend enough to get taxed at 23% of their income. In reality it would be us paying more. Skin in the game my ass.
"The Rich" would never spend "enough" to get taxed at 23%, because in order to do that they would have to spend every cent they get. And they got rich by not doing so.
And if you don't want to spend 23% all you have to do is not spend all your money.
On the other hand The Poor will spend far less than 23% because they won't be spending their own money; they will be spending prebate money.
"The Rich" would never spend "enough" to get taxed at 23%, because in order to do that they would have to spend every cent they get. And they got rich by not doing so.
And if you don't want to spend 23% all you have to do is not spend all your money.
On the other hand The Poor will spend far less than 23% because they won't be spending their own money; they will be spending prebate money.
Complete and utter bullcrap. You are buying the company line at face-value instead of being skeptic of it and looking at the details. The prebate is only $209 extra a month. It's a drop in the bucket. Say I earn $600 a pay period to make it easy. While YES, I don't pay Uncle Sam some $100 of each check, I instead pay it by purchases. That shirt at Sears, 23% of the proceeds go to Uncle Sam; that Taco Bell lunch after work; 23% of the proceeds go to Uncle Sam, my rent 23% of the proceeds go to Uncle Sam; my groceries at WinCo or Fry's, 23% goes to Uncle Sam; the gas for my car, 23% of the proceeds go to Uncle Sam; etc. Not to mention that due to 23% of the sales price for new goods and any service, prices will likely rise.
Quote:
But the FairTax Will Lower Prices
Proponents of the FairTax point out that prices on consumer goods contain what are called “hidden taxes.” Under current law, corporations have to pay taxes on their earnings. Moreover, businesses have to pay social security taxes for each employee. The money to pay these taxes has to come from somewhere, and FairTax supporters argue that the cost is passed on to the consumer. In fact, the best-known proponent of the FairTax, talk-show host Neal Boortz, argues that 22 percent of the price of a consumer good is really a “hidden tax.” Get rid of corporate and social security taxes, Boortz argues, and consumer good prices would drop by 22 percent. Even with the 23 percent FairTax, prices stay the same, and with the elimination of income taxes, paychecks will get bigger. Everyone gets a raise and the federal government still gets its revenue. About 10 percent of the e-mail messages we received from FairTax proponents trumpeted this kind of magic act. It is easy to understand the confusion on the issue, as Boortz himself made similar assertions in the hardcover edition of his book. (He later issued a corrected version in paperback.)
A bit of critical analysis shows that this cannot be right. The FairTax is revenue-neutral. That means that for every tax dollar collected under the current system, the FairTax has to collect a dollar. If the FairTax exactly equaled embedded taxes, then it could not possibly be revenue-neutral, since embedded taxes do not take into account personal income or estate taxes. The FairTax rate would have to be high enough to replace embedded taxes plus income and estate taxes.
Chris Edwards, the Cato Institute’s director of tax policy studies, points out that prices do not really matter; corporate, payroll, income and estate taxes currently generate approximately $2.4 trillion, and a revenue-neutral FairTax would still require that taxpayers pony up $2.4 trillion. Nor is it clear that the 22 percent embedded tax figure is particularly meaningful. David Burton, chief economist of the Americans for Fair Taxation, calls it "simplistic" to think that the entire cost of corporate taxes is borne by consumers. Cato’s Edwards suggests that while consumers do pay at least part of the costs, producers also bear some of the burden. That is, employees pay part of the costs of hidden taxes (in the form of lower wages), and corporate shareholders pay another portion (in the form of lower returns on their investments).
So we may not see prices rise, but we may see wages drop instead. But hey, I got the prebate right...
Complete and utter bullcrap. You are buying the company line at face-value instead of being skeptic of it and looking at the details. The prebate is only $209 extra a month. It's a drop in the bucket. Say I earn $600 a pay period to make it easy. While YES, I don't pay Uncle Sam some $100 of each check, I instead pay it by purchases. That shirt at Sears, 23% of the proceeds go to Uncle Sam; that Taco Bell lunch after work; 23% of the proceeds go to Uncle Sam, my rent 23% of the proceeds go to Uncle Sam; my groceries at WinCo or Fry's, 23% goes to Uncle Sam; the gas for my car, 23% of the proceeds go to Uncle Sam; etc. Not to mention that due to 23% of the sales price for new goods and any service, prices will likely rise.
So we may not see prices rise, but we may see wages drop instead. But hey, I got the prebate right...
Incorrect. You can quote the hard, black and white "rules" of the fair tax, but when you look at what Johnson actually says himself on his website, he accounts for and calls out many of the specifics you cite as issues.
Incorrect. You can quote the hard, black and white "rules" of the fair tax, but when you look at what Johnson actually says himself on his website, he accounts for and calls out many of the specifics you cite as issues.
You're just cherry picking the facts. The fact is under the Fair Tax proposal (the one Johnson wants to model if not utilize for his tax policy) is an across the board sales tax for new goods and services. So in reality 23% of any new goods purchase or service charge transaction, in fact goes to Uncle Sam. I don't see how the burden wouldn't increase whether prices rise or wages get cut in response.
You're just cherry picking the facts. The fact is under the Fair Tax proposal (the one Johnson wants to model if not utilize for his tax policy) is an across the board sales tax for new goods and services. So in reality 23% of any new goods purchase or service charge transaction, in fact goes to Uncle Sam. I don't see how the burden wouldn't increase whether prices rise or wages get cut in response.
I'm not cherry picking anything. He specifically said "no one’s tax burden for the purchase of basic family necessities would be increased."
You are basically making the argument that he wants to implement a theoretical "fair tax" policy with no flexibility in a black and white manner, while completely ignoring the facts of what he said about it. Its just being dishonest on your part.
I have no problem with folks that do not support Johnson, but if you are going to lie or misrepresent actual facts its hard to take your opposition seriously.
Why not?
You cherry picked expenses. He responded. Sounded fair to me.
Your rent won't go up. Is that a cherry picked fact? Sure.
Your groceries won't go up. Another cherry picked fact.
Gasoline.
Maybe some other stuff.
All cherry picked; all true.
Plus The USA gets to save all that money the IRS used to cost.
I lived in NM when he was governor. He pretty much does believe in totally open borders. Have you heard him interviewed in the past few weeks. I have to ask you, where are you getting the idea we do not understand what he is saying?
let me also assure you, many Trump voters are not in favor of the wall; we are opposed to what Clinton and Johnson are promoting.
Open Borders BOTH WAYS? Does he feel that Americans should be able to freely emigrate to Mexico or any other country?
I'm not cherry picking anything. He specifically said "no one’s tax burden for the purchase of basic family necessities would be increased."
You are basically making the argument that he wants to implement a theoretical "fair tax" policy with no flexibility in a black and white manner, while completely ignoring the facts of what he said about it. Its just being dishonest on your part.
I have no problem with folks that do not support Johnson, but if you are going to lie or misrepresent actual facts its hard to take your opposition seriously.
He's gone on the record in several interviews or town halls that for his tax policy, "take a look at the Fair Tax." Also here's the text from your link and the video...
Quote:
Today’s federal tax code does all the wrong things. It penalizes productivity, savings and investment, while rewarding inefficiency and designating winners and losers according to political whim.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ih-25JRCzdQ
For far too long, tax laws have been used not just as a means to collect needed revenues, but as a way for special interests to penalize their competitors while subsidizing themselves. The result is a tax code that is more than 70,000 pages long, enforced by a government agency with almost 100,000 employees. As a result, our tax code has created a nightmare for the average American, while providing shelter for those with the means to manipulate it.
Governor Johnson advocates for the elimination of special interest tax loopholes, to get rid of the double-taxation on small businesses, and ultimately, the replacement of all income and payroll taxes with a single consumption tax that determines your tax burden by how much you spend, not how much you earn. Such a tax would be structured to ensure that no one’s tax burden for the purchase of basic family necessities would be increased. To the contrary, costs of necessities would likely decrease with the elimination of taxes already included in the price of virtually everything we buy.
Many leading economists have long advocated such a shift in the way we are taxed, and Gary Johnson believes the time has come to replace our current tax code, which penalizes the savings, productivity and investment we so desperately need.
Stop special interest loopholes. Reward responsibility. And simplify our tax code.
There is NOTHING you spoke of in there, just the canned line with no support that you stated and take at face-value but I don't. There is no specifics, no explanation, just that canned line. Show me the meet and potatoes. I sent him an inquiry a few weeks back on his website, I got NOTHING but asking me to help spread the word on a candidate that I don't know I can trust with my finances. I mean while I may not agree with tax cuts, one can argue economically they may actually help (well until they don't like the Bush tax cuts when two recessions hit them.)
Oh an in the interest of fairness because I'm asking for the meat and potatoes, I'll show you some of mine. This is from the same Fact Check article I linked to earlier if you want the link.
Quote:
Even if Kotlikoff is correct that a 31.2 percent rate is revenue-neutral, there remains some reason to doubt that the rate actually would be that low. The FairTax proposal assumes a 100 percent tax base on consumption. By way of contrast, most states that have sales taxes have roughly a 50 percent tax base. With the FairTax’s 100 percent base, consumers would pay taxes on a great many things that may not intuitively seem like consumption. The list would include:
Purchases of new homes
Rent
Interest on credit cards, mortgages and car loans
Doctor bills
Utilities
Gasoline (30 percent in addition to current taxes, which would not be repealed)
Legal fees
At today’s prices, gasoline would cost almost $1 per gallon more. A $150,000 new home would run $195,000 – plus the 30 percent tax that the buyer would pay on the interest on the mortgage. In short, the FairTax taxes everything that one buys, with the one notable exception of education. Any exceptions to the tax base (for instance, eliminating rent or credit card interest from the tax base) would require an offsetting increase in the rate.
So remember what I said about rent, gas, etc.? That would be taxed just as spending for clothes, groceries and home goods would be. On top of that, the electric, internet, phone, cellular and television (whether cable or satelite) bills will now be taxed. My doctor's bill from my emergency surgery a year and a half ago would be taxed. Paying off my credit cards would now be taxed. That car note you signed, oh you'll have not jut the sticker price but also the interest going to that. While you may not have gotten a new home, that mortgage you signed for will now be taxed. Face it, the Fair Tax nickles and dimes us if not as much as the current system, worse. Well unless you're rich, then it is slightly less due to the cut-off of payroll taxes...
He's gone on the record in several interviews or town halls that for his tax policy, "take a look at the Fair Tax." Also here's the text from your link and the video...
There is NOTHING you spoke of in there, just the canned line with no support that you stated and take at face-value but I don't. There is no specifics, no explanation, just that canned line. Show me the meet and potatoes. I sent him an inquiry a few weeks back on his website, I got NOTHING but asking me to help spread the word on a candidate that I don't know I can trust with my finances. I mean while I may not agree with tax cuts, one can argue economically they may actually help (well until they don't like the Bush tax cuts when two recessions hit them.)
Oh an in the interest of fairness because I'm asking for the meat and potatoes, I'll show you some of mine. This is from the same Fact Check article I linked to earlier if you want the link.
So remember what I said about rent, gas, etc.? That would be taxed just as spending for clothes, groceries and home goods would be. On top of that, the electric, internet, phone, cellular and television (whether cable or satelite) bills will now be taxed. My doctor's bill from my emergency surgery a year and a half ago would be taxed. Paying off my credit cards would now be taxed. That car note you signed, oh you'll have not jut the sticker price but also the interest going to that. While you may not have gotten a new home, that mortgage you signed for will now be taxed. Face it, the Fair Tax nickles and dimes us if not as much as the current system, worse. Well unless you're rich, then it is slightly less due to the cut-off of payroll taxes...
1. Your first response was that I was "cherry picking facts" so when I counter that argument re-stating the facts from Johnson's website, you move the goal post and now claim not to believe what his website says because you are going to assume what he says isn't true? I understand if you don't like the Fair Tax plan, but you are intentionally glossing over what he specifically says about how he would implement it and you are changing your argument within the span of a few minutes. Feel free to just come out and say you don't like him and support someone else, but changing your story like this essentially tells me that anyway.
2. Yes, for "his" policy look at the baseline of the Fair Tax, I don't believe he has said its a 100% implementation that he wants, and I specifically say that because of the quote I highlighted before. People always try to pin the entire Libertarian (and now the Flat Tax plan) on Johnson as if he is going to try and implement it 100% to the letter of how it was written, however its clear that if you listen to him these are guiding principles, and not unbreakable laws that he feels obligated to be in lock step on.
3. You don't want to "take at face value" that he called out the necessities you mention like rent, fuel and food just because he didn't use those specific detailed words? I mean if those aren't basic family necessities then I don't know what are. You use the example of Taco Bell, and thats taxed now by most states because its not a "basic family necessity" like actual foods such as bread, milk, and produce.
4. Sorry he didn't reply to your individual email, crazy to think a candidate for POTUS would send out a canned reply to emails and not individually reply to every single one.
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.
