With the current tax code, there are so many loopholes that the rich can pay 0 taxes. The poor pay no taxes because they're poor. The middle class is left paying it all. That sure doesn't seem fair. The fair tax is based on how much you SPEND. It matters 0 how much you MAKE, hence 0 loopholes. If I want to pay less taxes, I simply spend less at the store. Sounds fair to me, and definitely a lot more level of a playing field than the current code.
It takes you until 2:05 to make a point. When it comes to the percentage point, no matter how you calculate it, you're NOT paying any more for your purchases. The one point I'll give you is that numerous, non-biased sources would definitely be nice.
This fact is directly for Fair Tax org's OWN RESEARCH: the "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-Inclusive aka NASTI would on average raise the effective taxes (i.e. raise the amount of taxes they pay) of those making from around $15,000 to $150,000 ,and would on average lower the taxes paid by those who make more than $150,000 a year compared to the current situation. It is a very bad idea, and would destroy the US economy if enacted.
As well as that, it is more simplistic, transparent, and the wealthiest Americans who dont tend to get taxed on payroll ( they get their money in capital gains and investments) will end up paying for the same tax percentages as the rest of us. Illegal immigrant problem will be done away with and drug dealers and underground criminals will pay even more because they will not get the prebates.( the monthly check from the government for the money needed to survive, around 400 bucks for a family of
What the hell are you talking about? You did not give any real information or statistics. Most fairtax oppositionists tend to believe that the taxing system in place now in the u.s must be the best because it hasn't been changed yet. Open your eyes, get the facts. The tax would bring millions of jobs through the business sector and outsourced corporations will come back bringing an estimated 11 million dollars that we lost by having the highest corporate tax on the planet
There really is no debate, as Americans For Fair Taxation's OWN RESEARCH states this fact: the "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-Inclusive aka NASTI would on average raise the effective taxes (i.e. raise the amount of taxes they pay) of those making from around $15,000 to $150,000 ,and would on average lower the taxes paid by those who make more than $150,000 a year. It is a very bad idea, and would destroy the US economy if enacted. Thankfully it never will even be considered for a vote
@1969was1969 Do you honestly believe high income peeps pay their taxes in full? They pay cheaper taxes than low income, and mid income.(damn you loopholes).. In my opinion FairTax is a good idea.
@eseoficial You are arguing apples and oranges... yes, I agree the wealthy need to pay more now, that can be achieved by treating capital gains as regular income, or by the Buffett rule. Under the "Fair"Tax aka National Sales Tax -INclusive aka NASTI, the wealthy would pay les than now. This is not my opinion, it is fact directly from the Fair Tax organization's own research. The "Fair" Tax would shift the tax burden onto the middleclasses and destroy our economy completely.
I would like to reply that on all the anti fair tax websites I have found (feel free to link me to one) they have not given the means on how they acquired their data. Even if its 30%, I would still totally be in. I have my entire paycheck and the price of goods drops down to there not being a corporate tax, plus the rebate which carries tendencies towards Milton Friedman's negative income tax (which is an AWESOME idea). Feel free to comment on this.
... that is that instead of govco taxing us directly on what we buy its more like taxing the retailer on what they sell (try not to split hairs)? govco simply taxes the retailer on what he puts into his money drawer(figure speach) while the retailer is simply charging whatever the market will bare. so 23 being 30% of 77 is the wrong equation. 23 is 23% of 100 and is the right equation. Ron Paul / Herman Cain 2012, come on brother !
... if he could sell those boots off the record as to avoid paying govco their 23% then he would still get what ever the market will bare. if it is only $100 then it will not magicly change to $123 over night when the FT takes affect. the retailer can't just tac on 23% to those $100 boots if the market only bares that they are worth $100. the math confusion is due to how we have gotten used to seeing a price of something not including the tax(inclusive vs exclusive). ... to be continued ....
your math is wrong, it is 23%,here is how & why. in a store where that pair of boots caught your eye,the price tag is $100 so that means that when it is scaned at the check out it is still $100 not $123. govco gets 23 of those 100 dollars. you can't think of the other $77 as what the boots would cost if there was no tax at all! nor does the retailer jack the price to $123 when the FT takes affect. the retailer sets his price based on what the market will bare.
Your points are not valid, nor have you really read all about the Fair Tax. David G. Tuerck, Ph.D. , Jonathan Haughton, Ph.D. , Paul Bachman, MSIE,
Alfonso Sanchez-Penalver, MSF at The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University who did the research are not just morons on You Tube like yourself. Perhaps if you have an highly education perhaps you would understand. Since your just 'pretty good' at numbers. Maybe that's why we are where we at.
The "Fair" Tax is basically class warfare,the wealthy declaring war on the middleclasses by raising their effective tax rates. It would, by Americans for Fair Taxation's own admission, raise the effective tax rate of those making from $15,000 to $150,000 a year while lowering the effective rate of those making $150,000 and up a year. Source:tinyurl 593htl, page 30 on -pay particular attention to table 13, years 7-8 -- would you be "better off" if your income dropped from $25k to less than $10k?
do you have a better idea than a consumption tax? it destroys the ability to evade income tax.. i mean, you have to eat sometime? (this is pretty intelligent is it not?)
under the table workers will no longer cheat the system, figured this would be good..
It is easy to demogogue radical change. First, radical change is unfamiliar to most folks, as they have become accustomed to the economic shackles that they wear. Second, the group of people that are promoting the change may not be comprised of these folks friends and immediate family. How could complete strangers ever come up with an idea that would benefit me? Third, why would anyone suggest a change that would benefit our nation and it's people so well?
I haven't heard anyone mention the billions we pay yearly just to comply with the IRS. They are costing us way more than just our tax burden. We would save trillions by simply getting rid of the IRS and all of it's complexities and liabilities. Those of u who condemn the FT don't understand all the $ we will have once the IRS is gone forever, in favor of a simpler tax code run by the Treasury Dept.
@epw0003 I believe the compliance figure for this fiscal year is around $467 Billion Dollars. That's just the cost of trying to comply with the 72.000 + pages of indecipherable code, rules, regulations, exemptions, forms, schedules, addendums, etc. Even the IRS does not seem to have a handle on this monsterous megalith of regulation and confiscatory tyranny.
@epw0003 I actually did some research on this. We would probably be saving more along the lines of 13 billion. Still a nice chunk taken out, but nothing substantial.
3) The numbers don't add up to what you think they should be. Let me address these individually: 1) Google "fairtaxdemocrats" 2) With today's tax code, roughly 50% of the country pays taxes. Under the fair tax everybody pays into it, at varying levels, based on income. 3) 23% is an average based on the percentage of tax cost built into everything we buy.
See what I mean? There is research. There is no 50K. nothing in the bill it self backs him up, but Mark has gone around this bend so many times now it's turned into a way to blow off steam. No. it's more likely he's just trying to bury comments calling him out beneath a few pages of repetitive cussing so no one reads them. oh well.
yup. showed him the research and rather then paying [hrm] 50k Mark did the equivalent of sticking his fingers in his ears, squezing his eyes shut and screaming "LALALALA" at the top of his lungs. It sounds a lot like his next comment. watch.
Hey Mark. Beaconhill's website has the latest research and the word "wages" doesn't appear in the footnote. fairtax dot org has a metric butt ton of research to look through.
@laudanum4u laud you stupid fuck --- wages appears in HR25. That footnote says government "investments" must be taxed in advance, but see their "Government Investment" in their math -- it's the wages. Wages are taxed in advance, dumb fuck. Look at their math too.
@anarok09 Fairtax is goofy shit. I offer 50K -- real money -- for any one to show me Fairtax research, because there IS none. I believed their shit too, till I read the footnotes and fine print. See my video for details.
Did you know Fairtax is a tax on military pay? Yes, Fairtax is a tax on military PENSIONS Bet you had no F-ing clue.
Hiding shit like that (there is much more) in fine print is not research -- its deception. They have no research, much deception
@ItchMyFoot Could you please cite in the text of HR 25 or S 13 (bill numbers in house or senate) where this fine print is? I would very much like to read it myself.
@JJBCalifornia Yes -- see my blogs and video. Briefly, Fairtax HR25 taxes ALL government consumption, except tuition and foreign travel. I have several blogs which show it in detail.
Plus, Fairtax official documents, the main one "Taxing Sales -- What Rate Works."
@JJBCalifornia HR 25 -- Section 2a subsections 7, 12, 14, all along there. I have a list -- and I show you what Fairtax SPOKESMEN admitted those sections mean -- plus, their math is based on these. I can't get your youtube email directly or I would send them to you. See my other videos, I show many of them there.
Soooooooooo...... You didn't really talk about any of the pros or cons of the Fair Tax. Very lack luster commentary.
PS. on the percentage comment. It is 23% when calculated inclusively, just like the income tax is. Since it is meant to replace the income tax shouldn't we talk about them in the same terms???
The easiest way to show a "Fair Tax" AKA National Sales Tax Inclusive AKA NASTI fan how they have been lied to by the main backers is to show them the facts on fairtaxorg's own site-- this tax would on average cause those who make from about $15k-$150k a year to pay more in federal taxes than they do now, even with the "prebate". Read and understand page 30 on at tinyurl 593htl. Do you think someone's life improves when his income drops from say $40k to $10k? Fairtaxorg does (table13, yrs 7-8)
The taxes are computed revenue neutral, as the current INCOME tax system is computed. The taxes comparison is between INCOME tax and CONSUMPTION tax. Of course it doesn't balance out with a sales tax comparison, because we don't currently have a federal sales tax to compare it with!
If it looks like a duck, and smells like a duck, then it must be an Obama supporter. FAR from a socialist? You are the quintessential socialist and it is clearly evident by the Kool-Aid stain on the front of your shirt. You're good with numbers but can't figure out how the tax works? Okay, what is YOUR solution? The Fair Tax makes it so EVERYONE pays their fair share. Illegals, Druggies, Thugs, EVERYONE. THAT'S why it is called Fair. We who work for our pay deserve better than this IRS.
You obliviously have not taken the time to read and understand the FairTax concept. The book is a quick read and easily understood (no law degree required). Before you chime in with your opinions you should take the time to study and understand. Other wise you end up without a good foot hold and fall flat on your face as I just witnessed while watching your video.
Stupid! How will you lose money? Tell in a way that you will lose money? I will tell you that I will gain money! How you say? Because every week I work, there will be no deduction! Paying 23 percent on new products, not mortgage,food, gas,nor any other bill! I gain 35 percent of my labor back into my purse!
@Jamesonhere You're incorrect-- the fair tax does apply to gas, food, doc bills-- pretty much everytthing one pays for that is not from a thrift store or used car lot. New home sales are included, and possibly any interest on old home sales will be taxed (interest is "new").
If you are currently paying 35% rate, you may gain under it. However, folks who make from about $15k to $150k/ year would on average pay MORE fed. tax under "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax Inclusive aka NASTI than now.
@FairTaxisaLie I have just offered -- seriously -- 50,000 dollars for ANYONE who first shows me any research by Fairtax being a personal consumption tax at retail level that would be revenue neutral.
Fairtax has NO research at all -- none. Zero. What they do have is some very deceptive nonsense, but even that does not claim to be a personal consumption tax at retail level, taxing things we are used to.
Fairtax is on pensions, IN ADVANCE -- on military spending IN ADVANCE.
These quotes are from fairtaxorg, from the "22million$" of research paid for, and concern "Households’ Well-Being under the FairTax"...
"Households in the top income category, with more than $150,000 in annual income, would also gain as they do not have to pay their highest marginal tax rates."
"Mid-income category * households would lose because the FairTax would impose a relatively higher tax rate on them."
They are removing the direct tax and replacing it with a sales tax. If I don't buy something that has that tax, I don't pay it. Right now I get taxed for working. If I don't work, I don't pay that tax. What sounds better to you? Get taxed on working or get taxed on something you buy? Are you a fucking moron? Where is the failure?
@Jamesonhere One does not get taxed for working, we get taxed to pay for the society we have built in which we earn--thus an income tax is the fairest best tax, as it taxes what we reap from the society to help pay for the society. Also, under FT/NASTI, nearly everything would be taxed at 23%i/30%e-- gas, electricity, rent, food,medical bills, et cetera ad nauseum. Except used items and (this is important)--Stocks and Bonds and possibly real estate.So guess what the wealthy will buy up tax free?
Do we really want to raise taxes on the middle classes (those making from $15,000 to $150,000 a year) while lowering the taxes of the wealthy (those making more than $150,000 a year)?
Even the SUPPORTING org's data shows that this "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-Inclusive aka NASTI would raise the taxes of the middle classes. See tinyurl 593htl, pages 30-on, particularly Table 13 years 7-8 and 15-16 to see one trick they try.
A 23% personal consumption tax, paid at the retail level, like we do in sales tax states now, would only bring in 800-900 billion dollars (Joint Committee on taxation).
Since Fairtax sends out 800 billion in the fucking bat shit crazy "prebate" -- that means the TOTAL revenue from this farce, using real numbers and not deceptive crap, would be 100 billion dollars. It's that fucking goofy.
Im all for it, by the way, please pass this shit -- but their leaders KNOW its bullshit.
@12FlyMe And you know they weren't evaluating H.R. 25 as it's written in that report. You admitted as much about a year and a half ago on whitehouse2 . org. But you apparently decided that dropping 3 F-bombs in the same post. would be better then simple honesty. Good for you. What ever helps you cope, big guy.
@laudanum4u wrong dumb fuck, HR25 is goofy deceptive shit, as I have always said.
In fact, Dale Jorgenson, the guy who Fairtax said did all that research Fairtax is based on -- totally repudiated Fairtax, saying essentially that Fairtax was totally wrong. That is their OWN researcher, you moron.
Fairtax is goofy shit. It's own leaders know it's goofy shit.
@12FlyMe That's because he's pushing for the Efficient Taxation plan my foul mouthed friend. Dems would never go for it do to it's, flat tax,regressive nature. but he believes in it anyway. Good for him. Fairtax doesn't need his support. Just his research, which he still stands behind. Is fairtax. org paying you to straw-man? now that would be dirty. make the opposition look bad be sending someone who debates badly on purpose.
@laudanum4u you idiot, Dale Jorgenson says Fairtax is ALL WRONG you stupid shit. he didn't just "not suppport it" retard. He exposed it, essentially, as a lying bunch of shit.
So have others -- like William Gale, Alan Buckley, Bruce Bartlet. Those who actually take the time to read the fine print and study the math ALL __ ALL report the same thing. Fairtax is a fraud, a bunch of shit, and their own leaders know it./
Another quote from Beacon Hill /SUPPORTERS' data: "If we group taxpayers by income per capita, the bottom five deciles lose under the FairTax." They try their best to fudge this data by claiming "but, under income mobility..." however, the problem with their fudging is that the "mobility" that provides the most benefit in their scenarios is one's income DROPPING into the poor range. As an example, they call dropping from say $30k to $10k an huge INCREASE in "utility" (basically quality of life).
Your a douche...! The amount of money earned just from the people who don't pay or cheat on their taxes would be worth it, you can't cheat this system of taxing, get your head out of your democrat ass and wake up...!
first I must apologize that your video seems have attracted Mark here. he's the one with the tourettes victim's command of the english language.
One good reason to calculate on an inclusive base is to compare it fairly with the current income tax. I'm paying 33% of my paycheck in various taxes. vs paying 23% of what I spend. or I'm paying 50% over my take home in taxes vs 30% over the pre-tax cost of goods and services. A bit oversimplified? Sure, but there is limited space here. Good luck sir
@laudanum4u If you are paying 33% of your income in federal taxes then you likely make over $150,000 a year, so of course want the fair tax, you would pay less. However, according to supporters' own research (and they admit it readily over and over in the research), those making from about $15,000 to $150,000 a year would pay more under the "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-Inclusive aka NASTI, and they would have a lower quality of life. Again.. that is according to their own data/research.
@Diskatopia then they would get it all back in the prebate. and I'm paying around 18% income tax plus 7.5% payroll plus 7.5 payroll contribution from my employer. I make a lot less then 150,000. not an attack just getting the math Strait. if one is below the poverty level one doesn't pay taxes under the fairtax. unless one living beyond your means, of coarse but that is a choice.
@laudanum4u You are the exception, then, not the rule, likely single,renting, no medical bills, and making $75k-120k a year. A 25% effective federal taxes rate on average is the top 5-7% of earners, about $150k & up( CBO data 2005). The supporters' own data (Beacon hill, fairtaxorg) shows that on average those making $15k-150k a year would pay more than now, even with prebate.
Most people under the poverty level don't pay federal taxes now, in fact many get rebates beyond what they paid in.
@Diskatop you are at least smart enough to see problems with Fairtax -- on it's face, that is, even accepting their own bullshit.
But you are too fucking stupid to grasp, its ALL BULLSHIT. YOu are like some moron who says "Oh let's don't buy that magic pony that shit's gold, because I noticed a limp in his walk"
Dumb fuck -- the problem isn't a limp, the problem is, its a fucking FARCE -- there IS no magic pony that shits gold.
From BHI/fairtaxorg:"Households in the lowest income band, with an (AGI) of less than $10,000 annually, would benefit because they would receive the prebate that would more than offset any higher cost of purchasing goods.Households in the top income category, with more than $150,000 in annual income, would also gain as they do not have to pay their highest marginal tax rates. Mid-income category households would lose because the Fair Tax would impose a relatively higher tax rate on them."
@laudanum4u PREBATE?? Fucking moron, 800 billion dollar add on, that is goofy as shit.
Look at the TOTAL net tax receipts for Fairtax. TOTAL receipts would be 900 billion, and the prebate cost 800 billion. You stupid fucks, that leaves a TOTAL NET income to the government, for EVERYTHING, of 100 billion.
That 100 billion would have to fund Social Security, Medicare, the Debt, Defense, and all -- ALL -- government spending.
That is the REAL math of Fairtax. Goofy, goofy shit.
What people like ichtyfoot and zauntstar fail to mention in their biased videos are that embedded taxes that are included in the price of goods BEFORE sales taxes, would eliminate 22% of the price. This is because taxes on producing the goods like payrole taxes, and the many other taxes involved in producing the final good would offset the (23 or 30) percent consumption tax. Keep in mind that people who demagogue the FairTax leave out many important details that make the FairTax what it is.
What people like ichtyfoot and zauntstar fail to mention in their biased videos are that embedded taxes that are included in the price of goods BEFORE sales taxes, would eliminate 22% of the price. This is because taxes on producing the goods like payrole taxes, and the many other taxes involved in producing the final good would offset the (23 or 30) percent consumption tax. Keep in mind that people who demagogue the FairTax leave out many important details that make the FairTax what it is.
What people like ichtyfoot and zauntstar fail to mention in their biased videos are that embedded taxes that are included in the price of goods BEFORE sales taxes, would eliminate 22% of the price. This is because taxes on producing the goods like payrole taxes, and the many other taxes involved in producing the final good would offset the (23 or 30) percent consumption tax. Keep in mind that people who demagogue the FairTax leave out many important details that make the FairTax what it is.
@whoucallinstupid wrong dumb fuck -- the world's leading authority on "embedded taxes" according to Fairtax is Dale Jorgenson. Fairtax tried to say Jorgenson supported their plan.
Utter fucking nonsense, Jorgenson repudiate their shit from the get go. Got that you stupid fuck? The worlds leading expert on embedded taxes says Fairtax is goofy shit.
@whoucallinstupid No, that "embedded taxes" canard has been disproven repeatedly. Income taxes are not "embedded" in the price of goods (hint: they occur at different rates for different employees, so they generally can't be calculated before sales), but SALARIES are. People pay inc. taxes from their salaries at DIFFERENT RATES. Think of two businessmen who sell widgets, one who sells a lot and has an effectice fed tax rate of 28%, and another who doesn't and whose rate is 6%. Think it through.
@Diskatopia you are right here. leather goods are at around 16% embedded tax and new houses are at around 26%. 22% is the average. this is glossed over in the books. mentioned but not fully explored as to the consequences to businesses that take advantage of simple to produce goods. this is one dent in the fairtax. the benefits still far outweigh the detriments.
@laudanum4u The main problem is they take a simple, and wrong, approach. They lump all federal taxes , divide that by total econ., and get 23% as the number. The problems with this are several--
1) Capital gains= after-effect tax, and aren't included in the prices of things (e.g., someone selling widget stock that went up and paying capital gains tax does not change widdget prices.
2)Estate taxes don't change prices of goods
3)Income taxes are paid at diff. rates from poor to wealthy.
@Diskatop No dumb aass -- the main problem is -- the have layer after layer of absurdity, deceptions.
They didn't take a "Simple approach" you idiot. SInce when the fuck is hiding 800 billion dollars in a footnote or to, a "simple" approach. What the FUCK!!!? They completely unfund SOcial security --but don't make that clear, dumb fuck. How is massive deception, you fucking idiot, a "simple approach"
You don't yet fucking get it, it's not an approach problem, its a FUCKING FARCE
@Diskatopia all costs are embedded, that is the nature of costs. This is not fucking some new discovery, but Fairtax fools its fucking idiots as if it were.
A sales tax to replace all federal spending would be 89%, not fucking 23%. That's the fucking problem
@12FlyMe Dude how in the Sam hill does a wider tax base of consumers pay more taxes then the smaller tax base of wage earners and come out with the same numbers? Bet the answer has to do with repetitive cussing.
if you're going to make up numbers don't insult Zaunstar here by doing it on his video. You just make his position look bad.
@laudanum4u wider tax base my fucking ass. The Fairtax tax base is pure hogwash you fucking idiot. IN their tax base -- which means things they tax -- are impossible, goofy, deceptive lies, and fairtax knows this. That's why they fucking hide it in double talk and goofy definitions, which I expose in my videos.
I wish I had Zunstar's demeanor and wit, but being politie to fucking liars and con artist is not my style.
@Diskatopia the embedded costs are real -- such as the embedded cost of employer's matching FICA taxes, which would disappear (supposedly)
The problem is Fairtax replaces ALL the embedded taxes and MORE. They don't get rid of a fucking penny of embedded taxes, they just hide it in a massive HIDDEN tax that city and states have to pay, for exmple.
@whoucallinstupid The "embedded taxes" canard has been shown to be a sleight of hand trick. People pay taxes at different rates, not an even 23%. There are two FT/NASTI scenarios-- 1) people keep "all their wages" (in which case prices stay the same PLUS 23%i/30%e tax. The problem with this is MANY midclass people, due to tax refunds, get all or most of their wages NOW. Those who do not are the wealthy, So under an FT the middles would have about the same income then a 23% tax on goods. Get it?
Zaunstar, I see no good reason to cuss you out like many other illiterate morons have done. The only thing I can think of is that you are a socialistic Democrat who enjoys putting up with the current 70,000+ pages of income tax code and loyally paying your taxes. But, thanks for exercising your human right of free speech. Even tho you are wrong about the FairTax, this vet will defend your right to your stupid opinion.
@deliriousdan637 I think I mentioned a simpler tax code in this video. I am all for simpler, but you don't need to go fair tax to be simpler. I hardly think being anti-fair tax is anti-capitalist. I am a Democrat, but far from a socialist. I am a capitalist to the core, and enjoy the fruits of my labor. Thanks for your service.
@Zaunstar I would love you to argue the difference in our current system compared to the fair tax. Compare the fair tax, as an inclusive tax, against the current system. Then, compare both again as exclusive taxes. What numbers do you come up with, since your so good at numbers. Next, I don't like the fair tax only because it is revenue neutral. I want something in the way of 10% inclusive tax. Much more reasonable than the fair taxes' 23%.
@deliriousdan637 you stupid fuck, I want a new tax code, that is why I liked Fairtax at first.
But since Fairtax is a giant ball of deceptive shit, since it's goofy as fuck, since it's own leaders KNOW it's goofy as fuck, thats not the way to go.
GO on you stupid fucks, PASS Fairtax, I would laugh my ass off. PLEASE pass that crap!!! God fucking almighty, pass it yo u retard. At least have hearings you piece of shit, so their fine print and footnotes will be exposed.
Bruce Barlett -- an economist under Reagan who now writes for National Review - exposed Fairtax as goofy years ago. He wasn't fooled for five seconds.
Corporations REJECTED Fairtax ---- according to James Bennett, a Fairtax spokesmen. Fairtax leaders tried to enlist corporations -- because their plan would be profoundly great for corporations -- but Corporations laughed at it, essentially.
Fairtax is goofy, the only people who don't know it, don't know the real history and fine print
@Fearlessechoes73 The prebate is probably the most insane thing about Farce Tax. It's 800 billion dollars, which Fairtax counts AS INCOME. They don't even pretend to pay for it.
They have 800 billion going out in this prebate, and they didn't even bother to add that to Government spending.
Which makes sense -- becuase they TAX government spending anyway, so they would be taxing their own prebate.
@Fearlessechoes73 the prebate is so goofy, it's 800 billion dollars, and they don't even count that as a government expense. They don't even account for it, in their math.
The prebate, like everything with Fairtax, is a giant farce. It's a house of cards, it's goofy. They aren't trying to pass this crap.
itch my foot: do you have a source for the one trillon dollar estimate for revenue collected as a result of "any...government" being treated as a person for the sake of taxation.
i've seen you post that number, and that is obviously you main sticking point, but i can't find that number elsewhere. would you mind linking to it?
@psychoboyaw Add up the spending by the federal government (3.7 trillion) add to that all city, county and state spending (say, 4 trillion, I'm not sure -- but it's massive).
Fairtax is a tax on ALL government spending, except education and foreign travel. Let me repeat that, Fairtax is a tax on ALL GOVERNMENT spending -23%
The most hilarious thing about Fairtax is -- if they could tax all government spending 23% -- they would not need to tax people at all. It's that goofy
so, that's a 'no', then? you have conjecture (that you'll admit is unfounded) and a basic misunderstanding of the terms used..and that's about it, right?
@psychoboyaw No dumb fuck -- after I started to sort through the Fairtax fine print -- which SAYS all city county and state and federal government must pay this - I asked Fairtax spokesmen David Kendall, James Bennett, and Ross Calloway, all three. IT was so preposterous that I spend a LOT of time talking to these guys online.
They told me YES -- all these cities, states counties, and fed goverment - would have to pay.
So this was all confirmed -I don't misunderstand this.
I am aware that government spending is subject to tax in HR25. I don't like it, but
this is not nearly enough to make me change my mind about the Fair Tax, and give up on changing the tax code.
Maybe some of you out there really like our current tax code. Not me, I think we need to throw it out and completely start from scratch. If you too aren't happy with the current tax code, but don't want the Fair Tax, then what would YOU DO to make it better?
@hokeysloan Cut out some of the loopholes, simplify the deductions, no corporate welfare, and keep the tax rates progressive like nearly every other industrialized country.
@Zaunstar The big thing would be to have unearned income pay like earned income pays. In fact, don't even have classifications of income. Whether you make it by wages, business income, derivities, leverage buy outs, dividends, whatever. That should not even be the government's concern. Let the free market work. Tax income, as income. That would be a wonderful start to ending the Tax bullshit merri - go - round.
since the FairTax doesn't tax income, only spending, then it taxes both earned income, unearned income (i'm assuming investment income), and existing wealth the same way.
no income classes, no government involvement in where you get your money. only the government getting a 23% piece of all your new retail purchases, collected by the retailer.
aside from you telling the government how many people are in your family for purposes of the prebate, there's no interaction with them.
the FairTax is more difficult to evade than the current system. right now, it only takes you lying on your 1040 to defraud the IRS. under the FT, you and wal-mart will have to collude to do it. since the IRS won't been looking at a hundred million individual 1040s, they'll have more time to devote to the 800,000 or so retail sales outlets.
the FairTax has the most simple of deduction plans: zero deductions. everyone pays on every new retail purchase.
the FairTax ends corporate welfare by leveling the corporate tax structure. businesses don't pay taxes, they roll those costs into the price of their goods and services. the problem lies when one business buys a tax cut another business can't afford to buy. let the businesses duke it out on a level playing field, and the consumer wins.
the FairTax is imminently progressive. if you earn (and spend) less than or equal to the poverty level, your rate tax is zero (or even negative). if you earn (and spend) twice the poverty level, your tax rate is at most 11.5%. earn (and spend) three times the poverty level, and your tax rate is at most 15.3%. 4 times? at most 17.25%...until finally you top out at 23% of spending.
@psychoboyaw The fairest way to do it is to charge a higher percentage as you go higher, and whatever cap that is at is too low. It should continue to increase. This is all kind of moot anyway, since it will never actually happen.
that's exactly what the FairTax does. the more you spend, the higher your effective tax rate. considering, on average, the effective national tax rate has been about 18% of income over the last 60 years or so, having an effective cap of 23% of spending doesn't seem too low.
if the FT brings in as much money as the current system does, i would guess the rate is about right.
@psychoboyaw That is part of the problem. It will not bring in that same amount. It would also effectively make used goods much more valuable, which would slow down the 70% of our economy that is consumer spending. Like I said, it will never happen because it's ultimately not workable anyway, but it's interesting to discuss.
@Zaunstar It's interesting as a psychological thing -- on the gulliblity and cult like mentality, of something so clearly bogus (once you know it). How did more or less rational people be taken in by BS -- what verbal "tricks" did Boortz and others employ?
They did it a lot like preachers do it, very similiar. Did you know their meetings open with a prayer? And then the pledge of allegence? And then a moment of silence? These guys were lulling their suckers to sleep
where is the support for the statement that it will not bring in as much? the closest i can find are the various and sundry studies that look at a NRST that is not the FairTax. the PTC and Bartlett took out giant chunks of the tax base, then concluded the rate on the remaining base would need to be higher.
so, is there an independent study of the actual FT language that doesn't change the bill before scoring it? is there a study that disproves the BHI report "what rate works?".
@Zaunstar Right- it would take about 1 day for 10-20 people to come up with a rational fair tax code, along the lines you mentioned. But no one is proposing that. The so callled "Flat tax" proposals are anything BUT flat. They have drastically different tax rates for different income. They have ZERO tax rate for unearned income--- ZERO. And all taxes, therefore, have to be paid by earned income.
I'm always surprised at how totally devoid of shame these guys are,
@hokeysloan Moron, government CAN NOT POSSIBLY pay tax, you idiot. They would have to get it from PEOPLE.
Remember, you stupid shit, that Fairtax said no corporate taxes because corporations "just pass the cost along to people"
Guess what retard? The government would have to pass the cost along, at least as much as corporations do. Too hard for your dumb ass to grasp? Plus, idiot, much of this, Fairtax has government pay IN ADVANCE. Read the fucking fine print, you idiot
so the people who currently work for the government don't have payroll taxes taken from their paychecks?, they don't have income tax withholdings taken from their paychecks? the payroll clerk in each governmental office doesn't have to figure the "employer's portion" of those payroll taxes?
@psychoboyaw who cares if they have to pay taxes moron? This would be a new tax -- ON GOVERNMENT. Governments can't fucking pay A DIME -- not one dime. They would have to get every penny of this from PEOPLE you idiot. So when Fairtax hides this massive tax on government -- they know it's foolish shit, because governments CAN NOT POSSIBLY PAY ANYTHING. Only people pay taxes you idiot.
Wake up, this is not rocket science. You are being fooled by goofy bullshit
@ItchMyFoot Bruce Barlett was a big whig under Reagan, he has trashed Fairtax from the start as goofy, a hoax.
Using real math -- not pretending to tax the government, for example -- a federal sales tax to replace all other fed taxes would be 89% --- 89%!!!! That is the REAL math - check out Joint Committee on Taxation Report.
With state and local sales tax on top of that, Bruce Bartlet showed the real rate could be over 100%. He said their would be riots in the streets.
please, go check out that report...find out how much of the GDP they left out of the base.
they didn't score the FT, they scored some other NRST they created.
Bruce Bartlett has been proven wrong logically and numerically on the subject on nearly every point time and time again, he might have been accurate at some point, but he's willfully ignorant now and he proves it every time he writes about the subject.
do you agree with what i've posted other places in this comment section? that the federal government pays income and payroll taxes to itself and state governments for its employees? that the state and local governments pay income and payroll taxes to themselves and to the federal government for their employees? that all governments pay the same prices you and i do when buying goods and services from the private sector, prices that have a significant tax component embedded in them?
government spending is subject to taxation right now. the FairTax just changes the point of that taxation.
every item and every hour of labor the government buys has payroll, income, and corporate taxes built into the price the government pays. when the USDA buys a new chevy pickup, they don't get a tax component free one. GM doesn't factor the payroll taxes it paid the people who assembled the truck out of the price. GM's suppliers don't, either.
What an idiot. The FairTax does away with all other taxes. That means that the embedded taxes will disappear. Those are about 23%. The FairTax merely puts that 23% back. So a $100 DVD player is still 100 bux; only now the cost of the DVD player is $77 and the FairTax, shown on the receipt, is $23. Morons like Zaunstar claim that the tax is on the $77 so it would be a 30% tax. Either way, the tax is still $23. He's just being dishonest so he can misinform you.
@kmcl11 - I'm not rounding down. When the embedded taxes are removed, the price of the item will go down. Not everything will go down by 23%; some more, some less. If you read the book, there is a perfect real world example included. When congress let the tax on airline tickets lapse, the airlines started dropping ticket prices. As soon as congress reinstituted the tax, the prices went back up. Remember that taxes are just another cost to a business that are passed onto the consumer.
@B17Boy Dumb ass -- according to Dale Jorgenson, prices only go down if we CUT WAGES 20%
Got that -- that is from the EXPERT that Fairtax says the whole plan is based on. Stick this up your dumb ass, where it belongs. That whole "prices drop" shit, is a FARCE, said their OWN researcher. Not some other researcher -- their OWN researcher, Dale Jorgeson.
the FT would be embedded in the retail price of the new good, just as the income, payroll and business taxes are now.
whatever price is on the shelf is the price it will cost you. if a DVD player is marked $100, you'll get a receipt for $77 worth of DVD player, and $23 worth of federal tax. (ignoring state and local taxes)
if you want to discuss whether or not a DVD player that is on the shelf for $100 today will be on the shelf at $100 tomorrow, we can, but that's an entirely different topic
@kmcl11 - The FairTax is on NEW items at the RETAIL LEVEL. So used items are not taxed and neither are wholesale items. That includes used homes. The tax on produce, or necessities in general, is offset by the Prebate. Nothing is taxed up to the poverty level. Please read the books and you'll see.
@B17Boy You stupid fuck -- its only PARTLY a tax at retail level you fucking idiot. Pay attention here you idiot. The bigger part is a MASSIVE tax on things NOT at retail level, you idiot.
Things like government wages and benefits -- ARE TAXED you fucking idiot. 300 Billion dollars, IN ADVANCE. Not only are they taxed, but Fairtax has them paying this tax IN ADVANCED
That's my point you dumb ass, you don't know shit, because you don't know the footnotes and fine print.
@ItchMyFoot - Am I a racist, too? You seem to have forgotten to call me that. Here, I'll help you with your liberal socialist lies. "B17Boy, you're a RAAAACIIIISSSST!!!" Do you feel better now?
Are pennsions retail level you fucking idiot? It's a tax on ALL WAGES and benefits paid by the government -- is that retail, you stupid shit>
In fact, the retail part of it is less than 30% of it. The biggest part is this massive hidden tax on pensions and benefits government has to pay ITSELF. It's fucking goofy
luckily, about 22% of the price of everything you buy is comprised of taxes that will be no longer part of the cost of the produce and homes. (actually, more in the case of those two items, since they are labor intensive).
and you get a tax refund (not unlike the current standard deduction) that offsets the FT you would pay on your basic food and housing needs.
@Zaunstar ITS ABOUT TAXES ON HOW MUCH YOU SPEND, NOT HOW MUCH YOU MAKE. MY KID SHOULDNT BE PUNISHED FOR SAVING HIS DOLLAR WHEN YOUR KID IS REWARDED FOR BUYING USELESS CRAP. EVENTUALLY MY KID WILL BUY HIS HOUSE AND YOUR KID WILL RENT.
Poor @12FlyMe (and other sock-puppets), even if Americans For Fair Taxation went around to every city + state government in the country handing out copies of the legislation, he'd still probably be on here using base and personal rhetorical attacks. He refuses to engage in actual civil and respectful debate and for that I pity him as he's profoundly wasting his (and everyone else's) time with unfounded claims that are falsifiable with the most basic fact-checking and critical thinking.
@MerlinYoda HR 25, the only place you can POSSIBLY even guess they might have a trillion dollar tax on city and state wages, military wages, etc etc, (yes, a massive tax on wages) is in Fairtax "definition of a person." They have a section on "Definition" and way way way way down the list - AFTER such things as defining "Designated Commercial Courier Service" they throw in this odd definition of a person. ANd deep in that definition, they have the term [any] government.
@ItchMyFoot So by this absurdly hidden fine print (WAY WAY WAY down in the fine print) they add a single word --"government" as a person. By this logic, they have a trillion dollar tax on government -- that virtually NO one knows about, That is how their math "adds up"
Guess who sent this to me? Section 2a, subsection 7 of HR25? Fairtax spokesmen! They were trying to prove to me they could tax city and state wages -- all spending really. We define the government as a person!
@ItchMyFoot Doesn't YouTube have a policy against sock-puppetry? You must rotate through these accounts (since it actually took you upwards of a week to "respond").
Anyway, *GOVERNMENT ALREADY PAYS FOR THE COST OF CORPORATE TAXATION EMBEDDED IN THE PRICE OF CONSUMER GOODS* (hope that was clear enough). One law for the rulers and one for the ruled is a very, very Bad Thing. Also there is *no* tax on wages (HR 25 replaces all income-based taxation), only on new goods and services.
@MerlinYoda what part of -- they are hiding this absurdity -- don't you get.
They call it TRANSPARENT -- got that you shit eating moron? They call it "TRANSPARENT" but in 13 years HAVE NEVER EVEN HINTED at what any city or state goverment would pay. NEVER. NEVER EVEN HINTED.
It's one thing to shove this insane bullshit up your ass -- suckers are born every minute. But notice they dare not tall Los Angeles city council it would owe 700 million.
The ignorance this kid portrays is amazing. Its no wonder our country is where it is. The FairTax is a national retail sales tax on all new goods and services for personal use. If you don't like the rate, blame congress, b/c The FairTax was structured to be revenue neutral. Guess what The FairTax HR 25 & S13 has a whole bunch of sponsors. Where is your solution?
@NoMoreIncomeTaxes You stupid fucking shit head -- go read the fine print you lunatic.
Go on, I have just completed a detailed account of the Fine print -- AND the explanation for it, by Boortz, Kendall, and Bennett. Go on dumb fuck -- it's their own fucking fine print, and their own fucking explanation for it.
You fucking pussy, to afraid to see your own fine print, and how fucking stupid you were to buy it?
I'll make the obvious point one more time. A corporation NEVER pays taxes. It can't. It is not alive. It is not living and breathing. All a corporation does is collect taxes for the government. It gets that tax money from the consumer and people like this moron in this video. He is paying for a corporations taxes in the form higher priced goods and suppressed wages and can't muster the logic to realize it. There is no hope for people like this. They are and will always be slaves .
@kanemasterDJG You are absolutely correct about corporations not "paying" taxes, not necessarily because they are "not alive" (as they're a group of people combining resources to do business and make a profit) but mostly because, to them, taxation is just another cost of production to be passed on to the consumer who then winds up shouldering the actual burden of the tax. Until people realize this simple fact they will never understand why people call for the elimination of corporate taxes.
@MerlinYoda go see the Fairtax fine print. Their insane "tax on government" is 500% higher than the tax on corporations. What fairtax did, you stupid shit, is to fool your dumb ass. They tell you corps can't pay taxes -- but government CAN . Corporations pay about 6% of the federal revenue. Under this insane Fairtax-- government pays 40% of the federal revenue. You have been bamboozled you stupid fuck
@12FlyMe 500% higher? Where do you pull your statistics from? I have my theories ... which would explain why they all stink :-P. Government would only be taxed for goods and services that qualify as "final consumption" ... you *never* mention that new goods and services that are purchased for use towards providing a separate good or service are not taxed (and government provides a *lot* of services ... though not for profit obviously ... and non-profits are another exemption).
Here Is A VALID Point Against The Fair Tax!!! - So we tax all goods so basically all the consumers, and remove the taxes from the huge corporations that run everything including government... OK? So the guy making billions at the top gets to keep it all? WTF? Then since he can afford it, he goes and buys his goods in other countries that don't have a 23% tax. While we all get screwed harder. DUH Second I saw Huckabee supporting it i knew it's fraud because he is a mainstream candidate.
@yabaworld So the "guy at the top" is going to jet-set to other countries (and will have to pay either 23% tax on jet fuel or 1st class ticket) to get a "better deal"??? You do realize that once the corporate taxes are removed (which are currently just passed on to consumers in the price of the good as a production cost) that prices will drop roughly equivalent to the tax rate proposed adding little if any net increase. Very unlikely they would get a net savings out of any country doing this.
@yabaworld Also just because Huckabee supports it and you don't like him because he's a "mainstream candidate" doesn't automatically make the FairTax a fraud. This is one of the many classic non-sequitur fallacies. I'm sure even Hitler thought bodily hygiene was a good idea but by the rationale you display here it would necessarily be a bad thing because he's bad, so everything he favors must be bad as well...
@12FlyMe No "second tier". Everyone pays 23% tax on services/new goods offset by prebate which refunds taxes on consumption up to the poverty level. You're probably the same troll("Mark Douglas" IIRC) that goes around saying the FairTax is a "farce" claiming govt. "would be a major contributor" ... puh-leaze, They're specifically exempted for purchases necessary for running govt (as are all non-profits). You read though the legislation to cherry-pick it yet have no actual *understanding* of it!
Go read their own shit Doesn't matter what I say --it's what THEY say. Got that yet?
Go read their OWN explanation for their OWN fine print. And next time someone tries to slide pure shit up your ass, maybe you will check the details -- and ask questions.
Fairtax sounds great, until you see their OWN explanations for their OWN fine print.
Go learn what the hell you are talking about, and get back to me.
@12FlyMe Sorry, but I've actually READ the legislation all the way though and reviewed it *several* times with a critical eye and have even went back and reviewed again it with criticisms of the legislation in mind (many of which completely ignore key sections of legislation) . The only way it "fails" is for at least one party involved in major tax avoidance to act in a way that isn't in their better interests.Stop being a Myrmidon! FairTax is non-partisan. Maybe you should try to be the same.
@MerlinYoda You dumb fuck -- I not only read it, I have detailed the fine print that hid this trillion dollar goofy tax on government. Got that you stupid shit? Go see HR 25, Sec. 2 (a) 7: Person
‘(7) PERSON- The term 'person’ means any natural person.... any trust, estate, government, .....
Do you see that you stupid shit? They define person as "government" then tax the government a trillion dollars.
You stupid shit - and Boorz ADMITS it, go fucking learn something real
(7) PERSON- The term ‘person’ means any natural person, and UNLESS THE CONTEXT CLEARLY DOES NOT ALLOW IT, any corporation, partnership, limited liability company, trust, estate, government, agency, administration, organization, association, or other legal entity (foreign or domestic.)
... maybe you should learn some basic comprehension skills before you try to "expose" legislation as the only thing you're "exposing" is your own shortcomings.
Zaunstar says that only "partisan conservative economists" support the FairTax. Zaunstar should go read the "not so conservative" article by Lanny Davis in his recent commentary in the "not so conservative" Huffington Post. Lanny says that when liberals OBJECTIVELY evaluate the benefits of the FairTax, that this proposal is definately worthy of Democrats and Liberal support.
I would have all income pay alike -- however you tax the self employed roofer or dentist or small business man, tax all income that way.
The biggest screwing in our tax code -- it all depends HOW you make your money. Naturally that's been used to screw the bejesus out of folks that don't write the tax laws.
So if you make 100K from putting on roofs, then the guy making 100K from leverage buy outs or credit swaps (god love em all) should pay same
@Zaunstar That is the best and most obvious --- in fact, wipe the income tax code clean, start over, and have a simple, progressive tax, on all income. Get rid of the penalty on work -- earned income, which pays 300% higher right now in many cases.
With the current tax code, there are so many loopholes that the rich can pay 0 taxes. The poor pay no taxes because they're poor. The middle class is left paying it all. That sure doesn't seem fair. The fair tax is based on how much you SPEND. It matters 0 how much you MAKE, hence 0 loopholes. If I want to pay less taxes, I simply spend less at the store. Sounds fair to me, and definitely a lot more level of a playing field than the current code.
respond2us 3 days ago
The Fair Tax is just a bullshit scheme to help ultra-rich people keep more of their money.
a0eoj 1 month ago in playlist FairTax
It takes you until 2:05 to make a point. When it comes to the percentage point, no matter how you calculate it, you're NOT paying any more for your purchases. The one point I'll give you is that numerous, non-biased sources would definitely be nice.
zombiechaddy 1 month ago
OH yeah, then let's just keep the current tax code, right?
kikiochiachi 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This fact is directly for Fair Tax org's OWN RESEARCH: the "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-Inclusive aka NASTI would on average raise the effective taxes (i.e. raise the amount of taxes they pay) of those making from around $15,000 to $150,000 ,and would on average lower the taxes paid by those who make more than $150,000 a year compared to the current situation. It is a very bad idea, and would destroy the US economy if enacted.
1969was1969 1 month ago
Sorry but your analysis of the fairtax is inaccurate.
prowlin4reds 1 month ago
As well as that, it is more simplistic, transparent, and the wealthiest Americans who dont tend to get taxed on payroll ( they get their money in capital gains and investments) will end up paying for the same tax percentages as the rest of us. Illegal immigrant problem will be done away with and drug dealers and underground criminals will pay even more because they will not get the prebates.( the monthly check from the government for the money needed to survive, around 400 bucks for a family of
johnesdman 2 months ago
What the hell are you talking about? You did not give any real information or statistics. Most fairtax oppositionists tend to believe that the taxing system in place now in the u.s must be the best because it hasn't been changed yet. Open your eyes, get the facts. The tax would bring millions of jobs through the business sector and outsourced corporations will come back bringing an estimated 11 million dollars that we lost by having the highest corporate tax on the planet
johnesdman 2 months ago
There really is no debate, as Americans For Fair Taxation's OWN RESEARCH states this fact: the "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-Inclusive aka NASTI would on average raise the effective taxes (i.e. raise the amount of taxes they pay) of those making from around $15,000 to $150,000 ,and would on average lower the taxes paid by those who make more than $150,000 a year. It is a very bad idea, and would destroy the US economy if enacted. Thankfully it never will even be considered for a vote
1969was1969 3 months ago
@1969was1969 Do you honestly believe high income peeps pay their taxes in full? They pay cheaper taxes than low income, and mid income.(damn you loopholes).. In my opinion FairTax is a good idea.
eseoficial 1 month ago
@eseoficial You are arguing apples and oranges... yes, I agree the wealthy need to pay more now, that can be achieved by treating capital gains as regular income, or by the Buffett rule. Under the "Fair"Tax aka National Sales Tax -INclusive aka NASTI, the wealthy would pay les than now. This is not my opinion, it is fact directly from the Fair Tax organization's own research. The "Fair" Tax would shift the tax burden onto the middleclasses and destroy our economy completely.
1969was1969 1 month ago
I would like to reply that on all the anti fair tax websites I have found (feel free to link me to one) they have not given the means on how they acquired their data. Even if its 30%, I would still totally be in. I have my entire paycheck and the price of goods drops down to there not being a corporate tax, plus the rebate which carries tendencies towards Milton Friedman's negative income tax (which is an AWESOME idea). Feel free to comment on this.
Voiceofreason0220 3 months ago
Fair tax is not stupid. Your points make no sense.
anstear 4 months ago
... that is that instead of govco taxing us directly on what we buy its more like taxing the retailer on what they sell (try not to split hairs)? govco simply taxes the retailer on what he puts into his money drawer(figure speach) while the retailer is simply charging whatever the market will bare. so 23 being 30% of 77 is the wrong equation. 23 is 23% of 100 and is the right equation. Ron Paul / Herman Cain 2012, come on brother !
rshfn44 4 months ago
... if he could sell those boots off the record as to avoid paying govco their 23% then he would still get what ever the market will bare. if it is only $100 then it will not magicly change to $123 over night when the FT takes affect. the retailer can't just tac on 23% to those $100 boots if the market only bares that they are worth $100. the math confusion is due to how we have gotten used to seeing a price of something not including the tax(inclusive vs exclusive). ... to be continued ....
rshfn44 4 months ago
your math is wrong, it is 23%,here is how & why. in a store where that pair of boots caught your eye,the price tag is $100 so that means that when it is scaned at the check out it is still $100 not $123. govco gets 23 of those 100 dollars. you can't think of the other $77 as what the boots would cost if there was no tax at all! nor does the retailer jack the price to $123 when the FT takes affect. the retailer sets his price based on what the market will bare.
...to be continued ............
rshfn44 4 months ago
And we should listen to you because?
Ah,yes. You created a video. Actually many videos.
Wow.
scoutpea 5 months ago 2
Your points are not valid, nor have you really read all about the Fair Tax. David G. Tuerck, Ph.D. , Jonathan Haughton, Ph.D. , Paul Bachman, MSIE,
Alfonso Sanchez-Penalver, MSF at The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University who did the research are not just morons on You Tube like yourself. Perhaps if you have an highly education perhaps you would understand. Since your just 'pretty good' at numbers. Maybe that's why we are where we at.
ASkyMedic 6 months ago
I think Glenn Beck rejects the Fair Tax in favor of a flat tax.
voltairinedecleyre66 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The "Fair" Tax is basically class warfare,the wealthy declaring war on the middleclasses by raising their effective tax rates. It would, by Americans for Fair Taxation's own admission, raise the effective tax rate of those making from $15,000 to $150,000 a year while lowering the effective rate of those making $150,000 and up a year. Source:tinyurl 593htl, page 30 on -pay particular attention to table 13, years 7-8 -- would you be "better off" if your income dropped from $25k to less than $10k?
FairTaxisaLie 7 months ago
do you have a better idea than a consumption tax? it destroys the ability to evade income tax.. i mean, you have to eat sometime? (this is pretty intelligent is it not?)
under the table workers will no longer cheat the system, figured this would be good..
Bren565 7 months ago
It is easy to demogogue radical change. First, radical change is unfamiliar to most folks, as they have become accustomed to the economic shackles that they wear. Second, the group of people that are promoting the change may not be comprised of these folks friends and immediate family. How could complete strangers ever come up with an idea that would benefit me? Third, why would anyone suggest a change that would benefit our nation and it's people so well?
wnettles 7 months ago
I haven't heard anyone mention the billions we pay yearly just to comply with the IRS. They are costing us way more than just our tax burden. We would save trillions by simply getting rid of the IRS and all of it's complexities and liabilities. Those of u who condemn the FT don't understand all the $ we will have once the IRS is gone forever, in favor of a simpler tax code run by the Treasury Dept.
epw0003 7 months ago
@epw0003 I believe the compliance figure for this fiscal year is around $467 Billion Dollars. That's just the cost of trying to comply with the 72.000 + pages of indecipherable code, rules, regulations, exemptions, forms, schedules, addendums, etc. Even the IRS does not seem to have a handle on this monsterous megalith of regulation and confiscatory tyranny.
wnettles 7 months ago
@epw0003 I actually did some research on this. We would probably be saving more along the lines of 13 billion. Still a nice chunk taken out, but nothing substantial.
Voiceofreason0220 3 months ago
So the Fair Tax is bad because of these reasons:
1) Conservatives like it
2) The name isn't descriptive enough
3) The numbers don't add up to what you think they should be. Let me address these individually: 1) Google "fairtaxdemocrats" 2) With today's tax code, roughly 50% of the country pays taxes. Under the fair tax everybody pays into it, at varying levels, based on income. 3) 23% is an average based on the percentage of tax cost built into everything we buy.
Research is good.
jmiewlsn 7 months ago 2
See what I mean? There is research. There is no 50K. nothing in the bill it self backs him up, but Mark has gone around this bend so many times now it's turned into a way to blow off steam. No. it's more likely he's just trying to bury comments calling him out beneath a few pages of repetitive cussing so no one reads them. oh well.
laudanum4u 7 months ago
yup. showed him the research and rather then paying [hrm] 50k Mark did the equivalent of sticking his fingers in his ears, squezing his eyes shut and screaming "LALALALA" at the top of his lungs. It sounds a lot like his next comment. watch.
Hey Mark. Beaconhill's website has the latest research and the word "wages" doesn't appear in the footnote. fairtax dot org has a metric butt ton of research to look through.
laudanum4u 7 months ago
@laudanum4u laud you stupid fuck --- wages appears in HR25. That footnote says government "investments" must be taxed in advance, but see their "Government Investment" in their math -- it's the wages. Wages are taxed in advance, dumb fuck. Look at their math too.
ItchMyFoot 7 months ago
@ItchMyFoot that was way too easy
laudanum4u 7 months ago
@anarok09 Fairtax is goofy shit. I offer 50K -- real money -- for any one to show me Fairtax research, because there IS none. I believed their shit too, till I read the footnotes and fine print. See my video for details.
Did you know Fairtax is a tax on military pay? Yes, Fairtax is a tax on military PENSIONS Bet you had no F-ing clue.
Hiding shit like that (there is much more) in fine print is not research -- its deception. They have no research, much deception
ItchMyFoot 7 months ago
@ItchMyFoot Could you please cite in the text of HR 25 or S 13 (bill numbers in house or senate) where this fine print is? I would very much like to read it myself.
JJBCalifornia 7 months ago
@JJBCalifornia Yes -- see my blogs and video. Briefly, Fairtax HR25 taxes ALL government consumption, except tuition and foreign travel. I have several blogs which show it in detail.
Plus, Fairtax official documents, the main one "Taxing Sales -- What Rate Works."
ItchMyFoot 7 months ago
@JJBCalifornia HR 25 -- Section 2a subsections 7, 12, 14, all along there. I have a list -- and I show you what Fairtax SPOKESMEN admitted those sections mean -- plus, their math is based on these. I can't get your youtube email directly or I would send them to you. See my other videos, I show many of them there.
ItchMyFoot 7 months ago
Soooooooooo...... You didn't really talk about any of the pros or cons of the Fair Tax. Very lack luster commentary.
PS. on the percentage comment. It is 23% when calculated inclusively, just like the income tax is. Since it is meant to replace the income tax shouldn't we talk about them in the same terms???
hrsweat0097 7 months ago
The easiest way to show a "Fair Tax" AKA National Sales Tax Inclusive AKA NASTI fan how they have been lied to by the main backers is to show them the facts on fairtaxorg's own site-- this tax would on average cause those who make from about $15k-$150k a year to pay more in federal taxes than they do now, even with the "prebate". Read and understand page 30 on at tinyurl 593htl. Do you think someone's life improves when his income drops from say $40k to $10k? Fairtaxorg does (table13, yrs 7-8)
FairTaxisaLie 8 months ago
The taxes are computed revenue neutral, as the current INCOME tax system is computed. The taxes comparison is between INCOME tax and CONSUMPTION tax. Of course it doesn't balance out with a sales tax comparison, because we don't currently have a federal sales tax to compare it with!
MetroIceberg 8 months ago
If it looks like a duck, and smells like a duck, then it must be an Obama supporter. FAR from a socialist? You are the quintessential socialist and it is clearly evident by the Kool-Aid stain on the front of your shirt. You're good with numbers but can't figure out how the tax works? Okay, what is YOUR solution? The Fair Tax makes it so EVERYONE pays their fair share. Illegals, Druggies, Thugs, EVERYONE. THAT'S why it is called Fair. We who work for our pay deserve better than this IRS.
Sammywhat 8 months ago
You obliviously have not taken the time to read and understand the FairTax concept. The book is a quick read and easily understood (no law degree required). Before you chime in with your opinions you should take the time to study and understand. Other wise you end up without a good foot hold and fall flat on your face as I just witnessed while watching your video.
heckerpe 8 months ago
Stupid! How will you lose money? Tell in a way that you will lose money? I will tell you that I will gain money! How you say? Because every week I work, there will be no deduction! Paying 23 percent on new products, not mortgage,food, gas,nor any other bill! I gain 35 percent of my labor back into my purse!
Jamesonhere 8 months ago
@Jamesonhere You're incorrect-- the fair tax does apply to gas, food, doc bills-- pretty much everytthing one pays for that is not from a thrift store or used car lot. New home sales are included, and possibly any interest on old home sales will be taxed (interest is "new").
If you are currently paying 35% rate, you may gain under it. However, folks who make from about $15k to $150k/ year would on average pay MORE fed. tax under "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax Inclusive aka NASTI than now.
FairTaxisaLie 8 months ago
@FairTaxisaLie I have just offered -- seriously -- 50,000 dollars for ANYONE who first shows me any research by Fairtax being a personal consumption tax at retail level that would be revenue neutral.
Fairtax has NO research at all -- none. Zero. What they do have is some very deceptive nonsense, but even that does not claim to be a personal consumption tax at retail level, taxing things we are used to.
Fairtax is on pensions, IN ADVANCE -- on military spending IN ADVANCE.
ItchMyFoot 8 months ago
These quotes are from fairtaxorg, from the "22million$" of research paid for, and concern "Households’ Well-Being under the FairTax"...
"Households in the top income category, with more than $150,000 in annual income, would also gain as they do not have to pay their highest marginal tax rates."
"Mid-income category * households would lose because the FairTax would impose a relatively higher tax rate on them."
Source:tinyurl 593htl, pg 30-on
*incomes of about $15,000 to $150,000
FairTaxisaLie 8 months ago
Shallow.....
jonryker1 8 months ago
They are removing the direct tax and replacing it with a sales tax. If I don't buy something that has that tax, I don't pay it. Right now I get taxed for working. If I don't work, I don't pay that tax. What sounds better to you? Get taxed on working or get taxed on something you buy? Are you a fucking moron? Where is the failure?
Jamesonhere 8 months ago
@Jamesonhere One does not get taxed for working, we get taxed to pay for the society we have built in which we earn--thus an income tax is the fairest best tax, as it taxes what we reap from the society to help pay for the society. Also, under FT/NASTI, nearly everything would be taxed at 23%i/30%e-- gas, electricity, rent, food,medical bills, et cetera ad nauseum. Except used items and (this is important)--Stocks and Bonds and possibly real estate.So guess what the wealthy will buy up tax free?
FairTaxisaLie 8 months ago
Do we really want to raise taxes on the middle classes (those making from $15,000 to $150,000 a year) while lowering the taxes of the wealthy (those making more than $150,000 a year)?
Even the SUPPORTING org's data shows that this "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-Inclusive aka NASTI would raise the taxes of the middle classes. See tinyurl 593htl, pages 30-on, particularly Table 13 years 7-8 and 15-16 to see one trick they try.
Diskatop 8 months ago
Ive had amost 750 hits on my video exposing Fairtax for the bogus deception it is.
Not a whole lot, but it's getting around. Do a youtube search for "Fairtax deception"
ItchMyFoot 8 months ago
A 23% personal consumption tax, paid at the retail level, like we do in sales tax states now, would only bring in 800-900 billion dollars (Joint Committee on taxation).
Since Fairtax sends out 800 billion in the fucking bat shit crazy "prebate" -- that means the TOTAL revenue from this farce, using real numbers and not deceptive crap, would be 100 billion dollars. It's that fucking goofy.
Im all for it, by the way, please pass this shit -- but their leaders KNOW its bullshit.
12FlyMe 9 months ago
@12FlyMe And you know they weren't evaluating H.R. 25 as it's written in that report. You admitted as much about a year and a half ago on whitehouse2 . org. But you apparently decided that dropping 3 F-bombs in the same post. would be better then simple honesty. Good for you. What ever helps you cope, big guy.
laudanum4u 9 months ago
@laudanum4u wrong dumb fuck, HR25 is goofy deceptive shit, as I have always said.
In fact, Dale Jorgenson, the guy who Fairtax said did all that research Fairtax is based on -- totally repudiated Fairtax, saying essentially that Fairtax was totally wrong. That is their OWN researcher, you moron.
Fairtax is goofy shit. It's own leaders know it's goofy shit.
They just didn't tell your dumb ass yet.
12FlyMe 8 months ago
@12FlyMe That's because he's pushing for the Efficient Taxation plan my foul mouthed friend. Dems would never go for it do to it's, flat tax,regressive nature. but he believes in it anyway. Good for him. Fairtax doesn't need his support. Just his research, which he still stands behind. Is fairtax. org paying you to straw-man? now that would be dirty. make the opposition look bad be sending someone who debates badly on purpose.
laudanum4u 8 months ago
@laudanum4u you idiot, Dale Jorgenson says Fairtax is ALL WRONG you stupid shit. he didn't just "not suppport it" retard. He exposed it, essentially, as a lying bunch of shit.
So have others -- like William Gale, Alan Buckley, Bruce Bartlet. Those who actually take the time to read the fine print and study the math ALL __ ALL report the same thing. Fairtax is a fraud, a bunch of shit, and their own leaders know it./
ItchMyFoot 8 months ago
You make my brain numb.
HumbleWillis 9 months ago
Another quote from Beacon Hill /SUPPORTERS' data: "If we group taxpayers by income per capita, the bottom five deciles lose under the FairTax." They try their best to fudge this data by claiming "but, under income mobility..." however, the problem with their fudging is that the "mobility" that provides the most benefit in their scenarios is one's income DROPPING into the poor range. As an example, they call dropping from say $30k to $10k an huge INCREASE in "utility" (basically quality of life).
Diskatop 9 months ago
Your a douche...! The amount of money earned just from the people who don't pay or cheat on their taxes would be worth it, you can't cheat this system of taxing, get your head out of your democrat ass and wake up...!
johnboychase69 9 months ago
first I must apologize that your video seems have attracted Mark here. he's the one with the tourettes victim's command of the english language.
One good reason to calculate on an inclusive base is to compare it fairly with the current income tax. I'm paying 33% of my paycheck in various taxes. vs paying 23% of what I spend. or I'm paying 50% over my take home in taxes vs 30% over the pre-tax cost of goods and services. A bit oversimplified? Sure, but there is limited space here. Good luck sir
laudanum4u 9 months ago
@laudanum4u If you are paying 33% of your income in federal taxes then you likely make over $150,000 a year, so of course want the fair tax, you would pay less. However, according to supporters' own research (and they admit it readily over and over in the research), those making from about $15,000 to $150,000 a year would pay more under the "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-Inclusive aka NASTI, and they would have a lower quality of life. Again.. that is according to their own data/research.
Diskatopia 9 months ago
@Diskatopia then they would get it all back in the prebate. and I'm paying around 18% income tax plus 7.5% payroll plus 7.5 payroll contribution from my employer. I make a lot less then 150,000. not an attack just getting the math Strait. if one is below the poverty level one doesn't pay taxes under the fairtax. unless one living beyond your means, of coarse but that is a choice.
laudanum4u 9 months ago
@laudanum4u You are the exception, then, not the rule, likely single,renting, no medical bills, and making $75k-120k a year. A 25% effective federal taxes rate on average is the top 5-7% of earners, about $150k & up( CBO data 2005). The supporters' own data (Beacon hill, fairtaxorg) shows that on average those making $15k-150k a year would pay more than now, even with prebate.
Most people under the poverty level don't pay federal taxes now, in fact many get rebates beyond what they paid in.
Diskatop 9 months ago
@Diskatop you are at least smart enough to see problems with Fairtax -- on it's face, that is, even accepting their own bullshit.
But you are too fucking stupid to grasp, its ALL BULLSHIT. YOu are like some moron who says "Oh let's don't buy that magic pony that shit's gold, because I noticed a limp in his walk"
Dumb fuck -- the problem isn't a limp, the problem is, its a fucking FARCE -- there IS no magic pony that shits gold.
12FlyMe 9 months ago
From BHI/fairtaxorg:"Households in the lowest income band, with an (AGI) of less than $10,000 annually, would benefit because they would receive the prebate that would more than offset any higher cost of purchasing goods.Households in the top income category, with more than $150,000 in annual income, would also gain as they do not have to pay their highest marginal tax rates. Mid-income category households would lose because the Fair Tax would impose a relatively higher tax rate on them."
Diskatop 9 months ago
@laudanum4u PREBATE?? Fucking moron, 800 billion dollar add on, that is goofy as shit.
Look at the TOTAL net tax receipts for Fairtax. TOTAL receipts would be 900 billion, and the prebate cost 800 billion. You stupid fucks, that leaves a TOTAL NET income to the government, for EVERYTHING, of 100 billion.
That 100 billion would have to fund Social Security, Medicare, the Debt, Defense, and all -- ALL -- government spending.
That is the REAL math of Fairtax. Goofy, goofy shit.
12FlyMe 9 months ago
@12FlyMe Mark go to bed. You're making up numbers again. Oh look! There goes Ron Paul reading propaganda on the civil war! Go get him boy!
laudanum4u 9 months ago
oops my internet connection is bad sorry for the multiple posts.
whoucallinstupid 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What people like ichtyfoot and zauntstar fail to mention in their biased videos are that embedded taxes that are included in the price of goods BEFORE sales taxes, would eliminate 22% of the price. This is because taxes on producing the goods like payrole taxes, and the many other taxes involved in producing the final good would offset the (23 or 30) percent consumption tax. Keep in mind that people who demagogue the FairTax leave out many important details that make the FairTax what it is.
whoucallinstupid 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What people like ichtyfoot and zauntstar fail to mention in their biased videos are that embedded taxes that are included in the price of goods BEFORE sales taxes, would eliminate 22% of the price. This is because taxes on producing the goods like payrole taxes, and the many other taxes involved in producing the final good would offset the (23 or 30) percent consumption tax. Keep in mind that people who demagogue the FairTax leave out many important details that make the FairTax what it is.
whoucallinstupid 9 months ago
What people like ichtyfoot and zauntstar fail to mention in their biased videos are that embedded taxes that are included in the price of goods BEFORE sales taxes, would eliminate 22% of the price. This is because taxes on producing the goods like payrole taxes, and the many other taxes involved in producing the final good would offset the (23 or 30) percent consumption tax. Keep in mind that people who demagogue the FairTax leave out many important details that make the FairTax what it is.
whoucallinstupid 9 months ago
@whoucallinstupid wrong dumb fuck -- the world's leading authority on "embedded taxes" according to Fairtax is Dale Jorgenson. Fairtax tried to say Jorgenson supported their plan.
Utter fucking nonsense, Jorgenson repudiate their shit from the get go. Got that you stupid fuck? The worlds leading expert on embedded taxes says Fairtax is goofy shit.
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@whoucallinstupid No, that "embedded taxes" canard has been disproven repeatedly. Income taxes are not "embedded" in the price of goods (hint: they occur at different rates for different employees, so they generally can't be calculated before sales), but SALARIES are. People pay inc. taxes from their salaries at DIFFERENT RATES. Think of two businessmen who sell widgets, one who sells a lot and has an effectice fed tax rate of 28%, and another who doesn't and whose rate is 6%. Think it through.
Diskatopia 9 months ago
@Diskatopia you are right here. leather goods are at around 16% embedded tax and new houses are at around 26%. 22% is the average. this is glossed over in the books. mentioned but not fully explored as to the consequences to businesses that take advantage of simple to produce goods. this is one dent in the fairtax. the benefits still far outweigh the detriments.
laudanum4u 9 months ago
@laudanum4u The main problem is they take a simple, and wrong, approach. They lump all federal taxes , divide that by total econ., and get 23% as the number. The problems with this are several--
1) Capital gains= after-effect tax, and aren't included in the prices of things (e.g., someone selling widget stock that went up and paying capital gains tax does not change widdget prices.
2)Estate taxes don't change prices of goods
3)Income taxes are paid at diff. rates from poor to wealthy.
etc.
Diskatop 9 months ago
@Diskatop No dumb aass -- the main problem is -- the have layer after layer of absurdity, deceptions.
They didn't take a "Simple approach" you idiot. SInce when the fuck is hiding 800 billion dollars in a footnote or to, a "simple" approach. What the FUCK!!!? They completely unfund SOcial security --but don't make that clear, dumb fuck. How is massive deception, you fucking idiot, a "simple approach"
You don't yet fucking get it, it's not an approach problem, its a FUCKING FARCE
12FlyMe 9 months ago
@Diskatopia all costs are embedded, that is the nature of costs. This is not fucking some new discovery, but Fairtax fools its fucking idiots as if it were.
A sales tax to replace all federal spending would be 89%, not fucking 23%. That's the fucking problem
12FlyMe 9 months ago
@12FlyMe Dude how in the Sam hill does a wider tax base of consumers pay more taxes then the smaller tax base of wage earners and come out with the same numbers? Bet the answer has to do with repetitive cussing.
if you're going to make up numbers don't insult Zaunstar here by doing it on his video. You just make his position look bad.
laudanum4u 9 months ago
@laudanum4u wider tax base my fucking ass. The Fairtax tax base is pure hogwash you fucking idiot. IN their tax base -- which means things they tax -- are impossible, goofy, deceptive lies, and fairtax knows this. That's why they fucking hide it in double talk and goofy definitions, which I expose in my videos.
I wish I had Zunstar's demeanor and wit, but being politie to fucking liars and con artist is not my style.
12FlyMe 9 months ago
@Diskatopia the embedded costs are real -- such as the embedded cost of employer's matching FICA taxes, which would disappear (supposedly)
The problem is Fairtax replaces ALL the embedded taxes and MORE. They don't get rid of a fucking penny of embedded taxes, they just hide it in a massive HIDDEN tax that city and states have to pay, for exmple.
12FlyMe 9 months ago
@whoucallinstupid The "embedded taxes" canard has been shown to be a sleight of hand trick. People pay taxes at different rates, not an even 23%. There are two FT/NASTI scenarios-- 1) people keep "all their wages" (in which case prices stay the same PLUS 23%i/30%e tax. The problem with this is MANY midclass people, due to tax refunds, get all or most of their wages NOW. Those who do not are the wealthy, So under an FT the middles would have about the same income then a 23% tax on goods. Get it?
FairTaxisaLie 8 months ago
Zaunstar, I see no good reason to cuss you out like many other illiterate morons have done. The only thing I can think of is that you are a socialistic Democrat who enjoys putting up with the current 70,000+ pages of income tax code and loyally paying your taxes. But, thanks for exercising your human right of free speech. Even tho you are wrong about the FairTax, this vet will defend your right to your stupid opinion.
deliriousdan637 9 months ago
@deliriousdan637 I think I mentioned a simpler tax code in this video. I am all for simpler, but you don't need to go fair tax to be simpler. I hardly think being anti-fair tax is anti-capitalist. I am a Democrat, but far from a socialist. I am a capitalist to the core, and enjoy the fruits of my labor. Thanks for your service.
Zaunstar 9 months ago
@Zaunstar If you enjoy the fruits of your labor, why are you so willing to give it away to the government before you even get it?
asleeperj 8 months ago
@Zaunstar I would love you to argue the difference in our current system compared to the fair tax. Compare the fair tax, as an inclusive tax, against the current system. Then, compare both again as exclusive taxes. What numbers do you come up with, since your so good at numbers. Next, I don't like the fair tax only because it is revenue neutral. I want something in the way of 10% inclusive tax. Much more reasonable than the fair taxes' 23%.
asleeperj 8 months ago
@deliriousdan637 you stupid fuck, I want a new tax code, that is why I liked Fairtax at first.
But since Fairtax is a giant ball of deceptive shit, since it's goofy as fuck, since it's own leaders KNOW it's goofy as fuck, thats not the way to go.
GO on you stupid fucks, PASS Fairtax, I would laugh my ass off. PLEASE pass that crap!!! God fucking almighty, pass it yo u retard. At least have hearings you piece of shit, so their fine print and footnotes will be exposed.
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
Zaunstar you sure do know how to make a video that will generate a lot comments.
Do you try to rub people the wrong way for that reason, or do you really think that way?
hokeysloan 9 months ago
Bruce Barlett -- an economist under Reagan who now writes for National Review - exposed Fairtax as goofy years ago. He wasn't fooled for five seconds.
Corporations REJECTED Fairtax ---- according to James Bennett, a Fairtax spokesmen. Fairtax leaders tried to enlist corporations -- because their plan would be profoundly great for corporations -- but Corporations laughed at it, essentially.
Fairtax is goofy, the only people who don't know it, don't know the real history and fine print
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
you can't talk about the fair tax without mentioning the prebate, your statements are disingenuous. go ahead and flag this is spam
Fearlessechoes73 9 months ago
@Fearlessechoes73 The prebate is probably the most insane thing about Farce Tax. It's 800 billion dollars, which Fairtax counts AS INCOME. They don't even pretend to pay for it.
They have 800 billion going out in this prebate, and they didn't even bother to add that to Government spending.
Which makes sense -- becuase they TAX government spending anyway, so they would be taxing their own prebate.
Fairtax is goofy, not wrong, its GOOFY.
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@ItchMyFoot
have you read BHI'sTaxing Sales under the FairTax - What Rate Works?
page 9 tells what the rate would be if the prebate weren't included.
page 10 tells what the prebate would cost.
pages 11&12 show how the cost of the prebate was factored into the analysis of the revenue neutral rate.
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Did you even read my comment?
Fearlessechoes73 9 months ago
Way to not mention the prebate, which is the difference between the concept of the fair tax and a flat tax.
Fearlessechoes73 9 months ago
@Fearlessechoes73 I did a whole other video on the flat tax. That is not the same thing at ALL.
Zaunstar 9 months ago
@Zaunstar The fallacy of the flat tax is that the ones out there (CATO, ect) aren't flat.
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@Fearlessechoes73 the prebate is so goofy, it's 800 billion dollars, and they don't even count that as a government expense. They don't even account for it, in their math.
The prebate, like everything with Fairtax, is a giant farce. It's a house of cards, it's goofy. They aren't trying to pass this crap.
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
itch my foot: do you have a source for the one trillon dollar estimate for revenue collected as a result of "any...government" being treated as a person for the sake of taxation.
i've seen you post that number, and that is obviously you main sticking point, but i can't find that number elsewhere. would you mind linking to it?
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@psychoboyaw Add up the spending by the federal government (3.7 trillion) add to that all city, county and state spending (say, 4 trillion, I'm not sure -- but it's massive).
Fairtax is a tax on ALL government spending, except education and foreign travel. Let me repeat that, Fairtax is a tax on ALL GOVERNMENT spending -23%
The most hilarious thing about Fairtax is -- if they could tax all government spending 23% -- they would not need to tax people at all. It's that goofy
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@ItchMyFoot
so, that's a 'no', then? you have conjecture (that you'll admit is unfounded) and a basic misunderstanding of the terms used..and that's about it, right?
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@psychoboyaw No dumb fuck -- after I started to sort through the Fairtax fine print -- which SAYS all city county and state and federal government must pay this - I asked Fairtax spokesmen David Kendall, James Bennett, and Ross Calloway, all three. IT was so preposterous that I spend a LOT of time talking to these guys online.
They told me YES -- all these cities, states counties, and fed goverment - would have to pay.
So this was all confirmed -I don't misunderstand this.
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@ItchMyFoot
i didn't ask if you had confirmation about the taxing of government, i asked if you had confirmation of your number or your timeline.
since you don't know the number and can only guess at it, i'm gonna say you don't on that one.
since you haven't responded to my timeline query, i've gotta guess you don't have that one either.
since you have all this understanding, please tell us: what kind of time frame does footnote 19 create, and how is that number derived?
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
I am aware that government spending is subject to tax in HR25. I don't like it, but
this is not nearly enough to make me change my mind about the Fair Tax, and give up on changing the tax code.
Maybe some of you out there really like our current tax code. Not me, I think we need to throw it out and completely start from scratch. If you too aren't happy with the current tax code, but don't want the Fair Tax, then what would YOU DO to make it better?
hokeysloan 9 months ago
@hokeysloan Cut out some of the loopholes, simplify the deductions, no corporate welfare, and keep the tax rates progressive like nearly every other industrialized country.
Zaunstar 9 months ago
@Zaunstar The big thing would be to have unearned income pay like earned income pays. In fact, don't even have classifications of income. Whether you make it by wages, business income, derivities, leverage buy outs, dividends, whatever. That should not even be the government's concern. Let the free market work. Tax income, as income. That would be a wonderful start to ending the Tax bullshit merri - go - round.
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@ItchMyFoot
since the FairTax doesn't tax income, only spending, then it taxes both earned income, unearned income (i'm assuming investment income), and existing wealth the same way.
no income classes, no government involvement in where you get your money. only the government getting a 23% piece of all your new retail purchases, collected by the retailer.
aside from you telling the government how many people are in your family for purposes of the prebate, there's no interaction with them.
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
the FairTax is more difficult to evade than the current system. right now, it only takes you lying on your 1040 to defraud the IRS. under the FT, you and wal-mart will have to collude to do it. since the IRS won't been looking at a hundred million individual 1040s, they'll have more time to devote to the 800,000 or so retail sales outlets.
the FairTax has the most simple of deduction plans: zero deductions. everyone pays on every new retail purchase.
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@Zaunstar
the FairTax ends corporate welfare by leveling the corporate tax structure. businesses don't pay taxes, they roll those costs into the price of their goods and services. the problem lies when one business buys a tax cut another business can't afford to buy. let the businesses duke it out on a level playing field, and the consumer wins.
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@Zaunstar
the FairTax is imminently progressive. if you earn (and spend) less than or equal to the poverty level, your rate tax is zero (or even negative). if you earn (and spend) twice the poverty level, your tax rate is at most 11.5%. earn (and spend) three times the poverty level, and your tax rate is at most 15.3%. 4 times? at most 17.25%...until finally you top out at 23% of spending.
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@psychoboyaw The fairest way to do it is to charge a higher percentage as you go higher, and whatever cap that is at is too low. It should continue to increase. This is all kind of moot anyway, since it will never actually happen.
Zaunstar 9 months ago
@Zaunstar
that's exactly what the FairTax does. the more you spend, the higher your effective tax rate. considering, on average, the effective national tax rate has been about 18% of income over the last 60 years or so, having an effective cap of 23% of spending doesn't seem too low.
if the FT brings in as much money as the current system does, i would guess the rate is about right.
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@psychoboyaw That is part of the problem. It will not bring in that same amount. It would also effectively make used goods much more valuable, which would slow down the 70% of our economy that is consumer spending. Like I said, it will never happen because it's ultimately not workable anyway, but it's interesting to discuss.
Zaunstar 9 months ago
@Zaunstar It's interesting as a psychological thing -- on the gulliblity and cult like mentality, of something so clearly bogus (once you know it). How did more or less rational people be taken in by BS -- what verbal "tricks" did Boortz and others employ?
They did it a lot like preachers do it, very similiar. Did you know their meetings open with a prayer? And then the pledge of allegence? And then a moment of silence? These guys were lulling their suckers to sleep
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@Zaunstar
where is the support for the statement that it will not bring in as much? the closest i can find are the various and sundry studies that look at a NRST that is not the FairTax. the PTC and Bartlett took out giant chunks of the tax base, then concluded the rate on the remaining base would need to be higher.
so, is there an independent study of the actual FT language that doesn't change the bill before scoring it? is there a study that disproves the BHI report "what rate works?".
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@Zaunstar Right- it would take about 1 day for 10-20 people to come up with a rational fair tax code, along the lines you mentioned. But no one is proposing that. The so callled "Flat tax" proposals are anything BUT flat. They have drastically different tax rates for different income. They have ZERO tax rate for unearned income--- ZERO. And all taxes, therefore, have to be paid by earned income.
I'm always surprised at how totally devoid of shame these guys are,
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@hokeysloan Moron, government CAN NOT POSSIBLY pay tax, you idiot. They would have to get it from PEOPLE.
Remember, you stupid shit, that Fairtax said no corporate taxes because corporations "just pass the cost along to people"
Guess what retard? The government would have to pass the cost along, at least as much as corporations do. Too hard for your dumb ass to grasp? Plus, idiot, much of this, Fairtax has government pay IN ADVANCE. Read the fucking fine print, you idiot
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@ItchMyFoot
so the people who currently work for the government don't have payroll taxes taken from their paychecks?, they don't have income tax withholdings taken from their paychecks? the payroll clerk in each governmental office doesn't have to figure the "employer's portion" of those payroll taxes?
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@psychoboyaw who cares if they have to pay taxes moron? This would be a new tax -- ON GOVERNMENT. Governments can't fucking pay A DIME -- not one dime. They would have to get every penny of this from PEOPLE you idiot. So when Fairtax hides this massive tax on government -- they know it's foolish shit, because governments CAN NOT POSSIBLY PAY ANYTHING. Only people pay taxes you idiot.
Wake up, this is not rocket science. You are being fooled by goofy bullshit
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@ItchMyFoot Bruce Barlett was a big whig under Reagan, he has trashed Fairtax from the start as goofy, a hoax.
Using real math -- not pretending to tax the government, for example -- a federal sales tax to replace all other fed taxes would be 89% --- 89%!!!! That is the REAL math - check out Joint Committee on Taxation Report.
With state and local sales tax on top of that, Bruce Bartlet showed the real rate could be over 100%. He said their would be riots in the streets.
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@ItchMyFoot
please, go check out that report...find out how much of the GDP they left out of the base.
they didn't score the FT, they scored some other NRST they created.
Bruce Bartlett has been proven wrong logically and numerically on the subject on nearly every point time and time again, he might have been accurate at some point, but he's willfully ignorant now and he proves it every time he writes about the subject.
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@ItchMyFoot
do you agree with what i've posted other places in this comment section? that the federal government pays income and payroll taxes to itself and state governments for its employees? that the state and local governments pay income and payroll taxes to themselves and to the federal government for their employees? that all governments pay the same prices you and i do when buying goods and services from the private sector, prices that have a significant tax component embedded in them?
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@hokeysloan
government spending is subject to taxation right now. the FairTax just changes the point of that taxation.
every item and every hour of labor the government buys has payroll, income, and corporate taxes built into the price the government pays. when the USDA buys a new chevy pickup, they don't get a tax component free one. GM doesn't factor the payroll taxes it paid the people who assembled the truck out of the price. GM's suppliers don't, either.
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
What an idiot. The FairTax does away with all other taxes. That means that the embedded taxes will disappear. Those are about 23%. The FairTax merely puts that 23% back. So a $100 DVD player is still 100 bux; only now the cost of the DVD player is $77 and the FairTax, shown on the receipt, is $23. Morons like Zaunstar claim that the tax is on the $77 so it would be a 30% tax. Either way, the tax is still $23. He's just being dishonest so he can misinform you.
B17Boy 9 months ago
@B17Boy That too is a poor example. The taxes will go up. That 100 dollar item is now 123.00. Why are you rounding down?
kmcl11 9 months ago
@kmcl11 - I'm not rounding down. When the embedded taxes are removed, the price of the item will go down. Not everything will go down by 23%; some more, some less. If you read the book, there is a perfect real world example included. When congress let the tax on airline tickets lapse, the airlines started dropping ticket prices. As soon as congress reinstituted the tax, the prices went back up. Remember that taxes are just another cost to a business that are passed onto the consumer.
B17Boy 9 months ago
@B17Boy Dumb ass -- according to Dale Jorgenson, prices only go down if we CUT WAGES 20%
Got that -- that is from the EXPERT that Fairtax says the whole plan is based on. Stick this up your dumb ass, where it belongs. That whole "prices drop" shit, is a FARCE, said their OWN researcher. Not some other researcher -- their OWN researcher, Dale Jorgeson.
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
the FT would be embedded in the retail price of the new good, just as the income, payroll and business taxes are now.
whatever price is on the shelf is the price it will cost you. if a DVD player is marked $100, you'll get a receipt for $77 worth of DVD player, and $23 worth of federal tax. (ignoring state and local taxes)
if you want to discuss whether or not a DVD player that is on the shelf for $100 today will be on the shelf at $100 tomorrow, we can, but that's an entirely different topic
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@B17Boy ""The FairTax does away with all other taxes"
And adds a 23% tax on everything you buy including produce.Including your home!
kmcl11 9 months ago
@kmcl11 - The FairTax is on NEW items at the RETAIL LEVEL. So used items are not taxed and neither are wholesale items. That includes used homes. The tax on produce, or necessities in general, is offset by the Prebate. Nothing is taxed up to the poverty level. Please read the books and you'll see.
B17Boy 9 months ago
@B17Boy You stupid fuck -- its only PARTLY a tax at retail level you fucking idiot. Pay attention here you idiot. The bigger part is a MASSIVE tax on things NOT at retail level, you idiot.
Things like government wages and benefits -- ARE TAXED you fucking idiot. 300 Billion dollars, IN ADVANCE. Not only are they taxed, but Fairtax has them paying this tax IN ADVANCED
That's my point you dumb ass, you don't know shit, because you don't know the footnotes and fine print.
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
@ItchMyFoot - Am I a racist, too? You seem to have forgotten to call me that. Here, I'll help you with your liberal socialist lies. "B17Boy, you're a RAAAACIIIISSSST!!!" Do you feel better now?
B17Boy 9 months ago
@B17Boy retail levell my ass, you stupid shit.
Are pennsions retail level you fucking idiot? It's a tax on ALL WAGES and benefits paid by the government -- is that retail, you stupid shit>
In fact, the retail part of it is less than 30% of it. The biggest part is this massive hidden tax on pensions and benefits government has to pay ITSELF. It's fucking goofy
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
luckily, about 22% of the price of everything you buy is comprised of taxes that will be no longer part of the cost of the produce and homes. (actually, more in the case of those two items, since they are labor intensive).
and you get a tax refund (not unlike the current standard deduction) that offsets the FT you would pay on your basic food and housing needs.
psychoboyaw 9 months ago
@B17Boy You stupid fuck -- the math is based on a tax on PENSIONS you fucking moron.
New York City would have to pay a 1.1 billion tax IN ADVANCE -- much of that on salaries and PENSIONS it pays.
Try to grasp that you piece of shit. A massive hidden tax, on PENSIONS, you stupid shit.
It's bogus fucking crap and they know it, its goofy
ItchMyFoot 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Zaunstar ITS ABOUT TAXES ON HOW MUCH YOU SPEND, NOT HOW MUCH YOU MAKE. MY KID SHOULDNT BE PUNISHED FOR SAVING HIS DOLLAR WHEN YOUR KID IS REWARDED FOR BUYING USELESS CRAP. EVENTUALLY MY KID WILL BUY HIS HOUSE AND YOUR KID WILL RENT.
pseudoprodigy 9 months ago
Poor @12FlyMe (and other sock-puppets), even if Americans For Fair Taxation went around to every city + state government in the country handing out copies of the legislation, he'd still probably be on here using base and personal rhetorical attacks. He refuses to engage in actual civil and respectful debate and for that I pity him as he's profoundly wasting his (and everyone else's) time with unfounded claims that are falsifiable with the most basic fact-checking and critical thinking.
MerlinYoda 10 months ago
@MerlinYoda HR 25, the only place you can POSSIBLY even guess they might have a trillion dollar tax on city and state wages, military wages, etc etc, (yes, a massive tax on wages) is in Fairtax "definition of a person." They have a section on "Definition" and way way way way down the list - AFTER such things as defining "Designated Commercial Courier Service" they throw in this odd definition of a person. ANd deep in that definition, they have the term [any] government.
ItchMyFoot 10 months ago
@ItchMyFoot So by this absurdly hidden fine print (WAY WAY WAY down in the fine print) they add a single word --"government" as a person. By this logic, they have a trillion dollar tax on government -- that virtually NO one knows about, That is how their math "adds up"
Guess who sent this to me? Section 2a, subsection 7 of HR25? Fairtax spokesmen! They were trying to prove to me they could tax city and state wages -- all spending really. We define the government as a person!
ItchMyFoot 10 months ago
@ItchMyFoot Doesn't YouTube have a policy against sock-puppetry? You must rotate through these accounts (since it actually took you upwards of a week to "respond").
Anyway, *GOVERNMENT ALREADY PAYS FOR THE COST OF CORPORATE TAXATION EMBEDDED IN THE PRICE OF CONSUMER GOODS* (hope that was clear enough). One law for the rulers and one for the ruled is a very, very Bad Thing. Also there is *no* tax on wages (HR 25 replaces all income-based taxation), only on new goods and services.
MerlinYoda 10 months ago
@MerlinYoda what part of -- they are hiding this absurdity -- don't you get.
They call it TRANSPARENT -- got that you shit eating moron? They call it "TRANSPARENT" but in 13 years HAVE NEVER EVEN HINTED at what any city or state goverment would pay. NEVER. NEVER EVEN HINTED.
It's one thing to shove this insane bullshit up your ass -- suckers are born every minute. But notice they dare not tall Los Angeles city council it would owe 700 million.
See the difference you stupid shit
ItchMyFoot 10 months ago
The ignorance this kid portrays is amazing. Its no wonder our country is where it is. The FairTax is a national retail sales tax on all new goods and services for personal use. If you don't like the rate, blame congress, b/c The FairTax was structured to be revenue neutral. Guess what The FairTax HR 25 & S13 has a whole bunch of sponsors. Where is your solution?
NoMoreIncomeTaxes 11 months ago
@NoMoreIncomeTaxes You stupid fucking shit head -- go read the fine print you lunatic.
Go on, I have just completed a detailed account of the Fine print -- AND the explanation for it, by Boortz, Kendall, and Bennett. Go on dumb fuck -- it's their own fucking fine print, and their own fucking explanation for it.
You fucking pussy, to afraid to see your own fine print, and how fucking stupid you were to buy it?
12FlyMe 11 months ago
I'll make the obvious point one more time. A corporation NEVER pays taxes. It can't. It is not alive. It is not living and breathing. All a corporation does is collect taxes for the government. It gets that tax money from the consumer and people like this moron in this video. He is paying for a corporations taxes in the form higher priced goods and suppressed wages and can't muster the logic to realize it. There is no hope for people like this. They are and will always be slaves .
kanemasterDJG 11 months ago
@kanemasterDJG You are absolutely correct about corporations not "paying" taxes, not necessarily because they are "not alive" (as they're a group of people combining resources to do business and make a profit) but mostly because, to them, taxation is just another cost of production to be passed on to the consumer who then winds up shouldering the actual burden of the tax. Until people realize this simple fact they will never understand why people call for the elimination of corporate taxes.
MerlinYoda 11 months ago
@MerlinYoda go see the Fairtax fine print. Their insane "tax on government" is 500% higher than the tax on corporations. What fairtax did, you stupid shit, is to fool your dumb ass. They tell you corps can't pay taxes -- but government CAN . Corporations pay about 6% of the federal revenue. Under this insane Fairtax-- government pays 40% of the federal revenue. You have been bamboozled you stupid fuck
12FlyMe 11 months ago
@12FlyMe 500% higher? Where do you pull your statistics from? I have my theories ... which would explain why they all stink :-P. Government would only be taxed for goods and services that qualify as "final consumption" ... you *never* mention that new goods and services that are purchased for use towards providing a separate good or service are not taxed (and government provides a *lot* of services ... though not for profit obviously ... and non-profits are another exemption).
MerlinYoda 11 months ago
Here Is A VALID Point Against The Fair Tax!!! - So we tax all goods so basically all the consumers, and remove the taxes from the huge corporations that run everything including government... OK? So the guy making billions at the top gets to keep it all? WTF? Then since he can afford it, he goes and buys his goods in other countries that don't have a 23% tax. While we all get screwed harder. DUH Second I saw Huckabee supporting it i knew it's fraud because he is a mainstream candidate.
yabaworld 11 months ago
@yabaworld So the "guy at the top" is going to jet-set to other countries (and will have to pay either 23% tax on jet fuel or 1st class ticket) to get a "better deal"??? You do realize that once the corporate taxes are removed (which are currently just passed on to consumers in the price of the good as a production cost) that prices will drop roughly equivalent to the tax rate proposed adding little if any net increase. Very unlikely they would get a net savings out of any country doing this.
MerlinYoda 11 months ago
@yabaworld Also just because Huckabee supports it and you don't like him because he's a "mainstream candidate" doesn't automatically make the FairTax a fraud. This is one of the many classic non-sequitur fallacies. I'm sure even Hitler thought bodily hygiene was a good idea but by the rationale you display here it would necessarily be a bad thing because he's bad, so everything he favors must be bad as well...
MerlinYoda 11 months ago
Comment removed
yabaworld 11 months ago
Comment removed
yabaworld 11 months ago
I have three Fairtax spokesmen's comments on their own fine print.
Google Fairtax fine print -- or better yet, google "Second Tier Fairtax" about the trillion dollar plus goofy hidden "second tier" of Fairtax.
12FlyMe 11 months ago
@12FlyMe No "second tier". Everyone pays 23% tax on services/new goods offset by prebate which refunds taxes on consumption up to the poverty level. You're probably the same troll("Mark Douglas" IIRC) that goes around saying the FairTax is a "farce" claiming govt. "would be a major contributor" ... puh-leaze, They're specifically exempted for purchases necessary for running govt (as are all non-profits). You read though the legislation to cherry-pick it yet have no actual *understanding* of it!
MerlinYoda 11 months ago
@MerlinYod yes there is a second tier
Go read their own shit Doesn't matter what I say --it's what THEY say. Got that yet?
Go read their OWN explanation for their OWN fine print. And next time someone tries to slide pure shit up your ass, maybe you will check the details -- and ask questions.
Fairtax sounds great, until you see their OWN explanations for their OWN fine print.
Go learn what the hell you are talking about, and get back to me.
12FlyMe 11 months ago
@12FlyMe Sorry, but I've actually READ the legislation all the way though and reviewed it *several* times with a critical eye and have even went back and reviewed again it with criticisms of the legislation in mind (many of which completely ignore key sections of legislation) . The only way it "fails" is for at least one party involved in major tax avoidance to act in a way that isn't in their better interests.Stop being a Myrmidon! FairTax is non-partisan. Maybe you should try to be the same.
MerlinYoda 11 months ago
@MerlinYoda You dumb fuck -- I not only read it, I have detailed the fine print that hid this trillion dollar goofy tax on government. Got that you stupid shit? Go see HR 25, Sec. 2 (a) 7: Person
‘(7) PERSON- The term 'person’ means any natural person.... any trust, estate, government, .....
Do you see that you stupid shit? They define person as "government" then tax the government a trillion dollars.
You stupid shit - and Boorz ADMITS it, go fucking learn something real
12FlyMe 11 months ago
@12FlyMe
Full citation (emphasis added):
(7) PERSON- The term ‘person’ means any natural person, and UNLESS THE CONTEXT CLEARLY DOES NOT ALLOW IT, any corporation, partnership, limited liability company, trust, estate, government, agency, administration, organization, association, or other legal entity (foreign or domestic.)
... maybe you should learn some basic comprehension skills before you try to "expose" legislation as the only thing you're "exposing" is your own shortcomings.
MerlinYoda 11 months ago
Zaunstar says that only "partisan conservative economists" support the FairTax. Zaunstar should go read the "not so conservative" article by Lanny Davis in his recent commentary in the "not so conservative" Huffington Post. Lanny says that when liberals OBJECTIVELY evaluate the benefits of the FairTax, that this proposal is definately worthy of Democrats and Liberal support.
AdakinValorem 11 months ago
What a dick...
jhorenka 11 months ago
So Zaunstar (what does that mean?), what is your solution ? it is easy to dis, not so easy to contribute.
wjsprsn 1 year ago
@wjsprsn I would rather change some of the levels of today's income tax to make it a bit more progressive, and reduce some of the loopholes.
Zaunstar 1 year ago
@Zaunstar That is what is needed.
I would have all income pay alike -- however you tax the self employed roofer or dentist or small business man, tax all income that way.
The biggest screwing in our tax code -- it all depends HOW you make your money. Naturally that's been used to screw the bejesus out of folks that don't write the tax laws.
So if you make 100K from putting on roofs, then the guy making 100K from leverage buy outs or credit swaps (god love em all) should pay same
12FlyMe 11 months ago
@Zaunstar That is the best and most obvious --- in fact, wipe the income tax code clean, start over, and have a simple, progressive tax, on all income. Get rid of the penalty on work -- earned income, which pays 300% higher right now in many cases.
12FlyMe