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.
What about the people who make between $50-$75K? They aren't exactly living high on the hog. And if they are living in NYC, San Fran, Seattle, LA, then they are paying EVERY PENNY to rent, food and utilities.
Which is why my wife and I would not live in those places, and why people under the FairTax could spend more on used items in order to avoid taxes. The cost of living is not something the FairTax can remedy, though it would be very good for the economy and could mean we would eventually see lower taxes.
Which is why my wife and I would not live in those places, and why people under the FairTax could spend more on used items in order to avoid taxes. The cost of living is not something the FairTax can remedy, though it would be very good for the economy and could mean we would eventually see lower taxes.
Though I see pros and cons with the Fair Tax, an important benefit is encouraging thrift and diligence. However, how would we financially incentivize things of potential national importance, such as the purchase of high mileage vehicles?
Maybe my eyes are playing tricks on me, but it looks like that chart goes to 95k and that the intervals are 15k each.
5k, 20k, 35k, 50k, 65k, 80k, 95k
The numbers are impossible to read. (I don't set my computer to 800x600 either.)
Nevertheless, the rebates don't address MIDDLE INCOME people who are spending almost every penny they earn on sustenance.
I read a very interesting review about Neal Boortz' new book.
I completely concur with the review.
Rather than addressing the real PROS and CONS of the FairTax plan, he glosses over the cons with fluff, and doesn't really address it. If he were honest about it, he would state the real cons of his idea, and then restate the pros and make a case why the pros outweigh the cons.
Instead, he plays a game and superficially addresses cons as if anyone who had strong objections would be pacified with such shallow answers that don't really answer the questions in a satisfactory manner.
Which is why my wife and I would not live in those places, and why people under the FairTax could spend more on used items in order to avoid taxes. The cost of living is not something the FairTax can remedy, though it would be very good for the economy and could mean we would eventually see lower taxes.
That assumes you have money left over after rent, electricity, telephone, food and gas or public transport to buy used items.
Any sweeping change in the tax system, has to address the real cost of living differences.
The numbers are impossible to read. (I don't set my computer to 800x600 either.)
Nevertheless, the rebates don't address MIDDLE INCOME people who are spending almost every penny they earn on sustenance.
I read a very interesting review about Neal Boortz' new book.
I completely concur with the review.
Rather than addressing the real PROS and CONS of the FairTax plan, he glosses over the cons with fluff, and doesn't really address it. If he were honest about it, he would state the real cons of his idea, and then restate the pros and make a case why the pros outweigh the cons.
Instead, he plays a game and superficially addresses cons as if anyone who had strong objections would be pacified with such shallow answers that don't really answer the questions in a satisfactory manner.
That assumes you have money left over after rent, electricity, telephone, food and gas or public transport to buy used items.
Any sweeping change in the tax system, has to address the real cost of living differences.
If one has a middle-class income, and has no "money left over", then one has a problem with money management. Why should other taxpayers have ANY responsibility to help these individuals? The problem is related to irresponsible behavior, generally speaking, and any amount of money won't change this.
If one has a middle-class income, and has no "money left over", then one has a problem with money management. Why should other taxpayers have ANY responsibility to help these individuals? The problem is related to irresponsible behavior, generally speaking, and any amount of money won't change this.
However, I have read transcripts of interviews where he was asked questions, where he has done a dance at answering them. I also spent a lot of time on Fairtax website, and did not get anything but the most shallow of answers to questions that I wanted to see answered in a lot more detail.
If one has a middle-class income, and has no "money left over", then one has a problem with money management. Why should other taxpayers have ANY responsibility to help these individuals? The problem is related to irresponsible behavior, generally speaking, and any amount of money won't change this.
Leave it to you to always state things that have been disproven over and over again.
The average household makes in the mid-40's. Please take a look at the cost of living in SF, NY, Seattle etc. and in particular, housing and then come back to me on the irresponsible thing (which has been proven to be a false meme.)
But hey, rhetoric is a lot more comforting than facts.
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.
