Added: 1 year ago
From: RobertCiali
Views: 1,447
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (28)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • "I CAN'T SAY THAT I LOST MY JOB, I KNOW WHERE IT IS

    THERE'S AN ASS-HOLE IN CHINA WHO THINKS THAT IT'S HIS"

    from the mears brothers song "factory town" check it out on youtube!!!

  • Stop the debt!!!

  • I like the fair tax plan, but progressives will fight it tooth and nail, so you'll probably see just a few internal taxes removed, not all five. You'll see some U.S. products become competitive, not all of them; so you may be disappointed. My goal in Robbing Peter was to come up with a plan that would equalize U.S. & foreign prices in America next week & without violating any trade laws. It's a control system (like we used to have) that adjusts burdens as needed to achieve that goal & no other.

  • @RobertCiali

    If we were to start with the fairtax plan as the excise tax, and then raised the rate to subsidies things government wants to subsidize, the plan would look kinda close to your plan. But doesn't government already subsidize? Thats why the fairtax rate is 23% of all new goods and services consumed in the US.

    I guess we could just go with the fairtax plan to remove the tax bias that favors imports and not raise subsidies.

  • Comment removed

  • Although the difference between the excise tax, and the fairtax is that an excise is an indirect tax, (the producer or seller pays the tax to the government passing the cost but remaining hidden to the consumer where as with a sales tax the cost of the tax is on the receipt.

  • @dtvgmedia The excise tax and the retail VAT do have their differences. Excise taxes can have different rates for different products. Doing that with a Retail VAT would drive retailers crazy. Our government doesn't subsidize industry to any meaningful extent. The high VAT rate has to pay for all the different internal taxes that the Fair Tax Plan eliminates and to pay for the prebate it must give to everyone annually.

  • It makes no sense to tax productivity in a global market when almost every country we trade with removes the cost of taxes embedded in their exports and taxes imports. We need the fairtax to make free trade more fair (tax wise).

  • @dtvgmedia My proposals accomplish all of that but not just with respect to taxes. Furthermore, they can be done tomorrow--no need for a massive compromise or a constitutional amendment. "Instant on" versus a decade of waiting for what could turn out to be another Washington half-measure. "We've made progress, but there's more to do" is what they'll tell us, as they always do.

  • @RobertCiali it would only take 51% majority to pass the fairtax bill, and eliminate the income tax and irs. A constitutional amendment repealing the 16th amendment to prevent future income taxes is a lot easer then you might think. most amendments were ratified in less then 300 days.

  • @dtvgmedia The IRS currently collects excise taxes. They're not going anywhere. They'll probably just get a name change.

  • @RobertCiali title 26 us code subsections A, B, C, D, and H are repealed, they go away. Administration of the The IRS is phased out over 3 years to collect back taxes. There will be an "Excise Tax Bureau" in the Department of Treasury to administer excise taxes not administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. SEC. 302. of the fairtax bill H.R.25

  • Comment removed

  • Your on the right track with tariff substitutes. But there is a plan already. It is called the fairtax.

    The fairtax removes all domestic taxes on production dropping the cost of american made products. The fairtax then institutes a national consumption tax which taxes consumption of imports and domestic products the same. This make the condition whereby domestic companies can compete with imports on the same tax footing. The fairtax makes free trade more fair.

  • @dtvgmedia The Fair Tax Plan is a tariff-substitute that corrects for many internal taxes, but it has limitations: It does not correct for (1) state & local internal taxes, especially the property tax, (2) foreign subsidization and "unfree labor," and (3) "internal tax-equivalents" like the minimum wage, unionization, etc. And it has no throttle-e.g., increase the min. wage by 50 cents and it fails! Check out my letters to Boehner and Obama at the bottom right of the RobbingPeter website. Thanks

  • @RobertCiali Each state has the power to determine which way to tax is best for them. There are several sate versions of the fairtax well on their way to being implemented before the the federal version. Much of what you refer to as foreign subsidization is the removal of embedded cost of taxes on exports. The fairtax effectively does the same on US exports.

  • Comment removed

  • @RobertCiali Increases in minimum wage does not effect the viability of the fairtax, Increases in minimum wage result in or is offset with decrease in dollar value because in a global market, it is impossible to vote more value for work performed so that the purchasing power of hour worked remains the same.

  • USA never gained independence. You have always paid taxes to the British. You are still just a colony "corporation" for the benefit of the "crown"- the richest 13 families of the world - not the queen who is just a front for the crown. Washington DC, The Vatican and London City are all self standing countries that dictate politcal, religious and bankin control over the world. The NWO is not new, the usa in my oppinion is a "money donkey" - a slave system for the rich to gain- even through debt.

  • @jiminiflix How do we fix it?

  • The concept sounds good, but it limits our ability to export globally. The truth is that real wealth is the combonation of natural resources and human labor. Wealth only comes from these two sources. Find a way to make human labor more efficient and natural resources more abundant and productive, and we will be the richest country in the world again. Wealth cannot be gained through taxation. It can however lead to increased depletion of our resources or wealth, unneccessarily.

  • @dlstb

    Tariff-substitutes allow a "free" export subsidy because they are made with excise taxes, which our trade agreements allow us to refund upon export. The refund referred to in the video is not considered to be the "refund on export" allowed by the agreements as subsidies stand on their own. Tax receipts on foreign imports will fund an equal amount of exports. Our 2-short video has left informed viewers like you with the wrong impression. Your take on wealth creation is well-taken.Thanks.

  • While you're at it, send him a copy of the Constitution, since he apparently hasn't read it.

  • This is a good idea, but everybody is scared of the word Tariff nowadays, that is what they are now talking about import certificates (as proposed by warren buffett) google it

  • @affiliate30 Tariff-substitutes are not tariffs. Technically they are excise taxes and subsidies, both allowed by our free-trade agreements. Import certificates could be ruled to be quotas, which free-trade purists have been trying to eliminate internationally. If we give import certificates a try, who will determine what we will buy with them, an import certificate czar? Should we buy toys or cars from China?

  • Comment removed

  • @affiliate30 Tariffs are levied only on imports. Unlike a tariff a domestic consumption tax like the fairtax taxes consumption of imports and domestic products the same. This eliminates the tax bias (domestic production tax) that favors imports.

  • I love Nan. And Bob. <3

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more