since day one to today congress had special taxes on certain things. they are called excise taxes. This wont change under the fairtax, although after switching to the fairtax I would like to see those excise taxes eliminated raising all revenue though use taxes a single national retail sales tax. Lets get rid of income taxes first and pass the fairtax, then lets deal with excise taxes, and tax everything the same.
Milk will not increase in price. Any inventory the farmer, or store may have receives a 23% transitional tax credit that removes the embedded cost of prior income taxes. New purchases of supplies material or equipment will cost 23% less with no embedded tax. adding a 23% inclusive or 30% exclusive tax at the point of end user consumption will bring the price back to the same as it was before the fairtax minus income tax compliance cost.
After switching to a 23% inclusive revenue neutral tax prices remain the same. Furthermore the rebate makes sure that no family pays taxes on their poverty level spending.
One might complain that government taxes too much, but if it eliminated all taxes, the problem would become apparent that it is government spending that is the real problem you and i have. But while you and i might share this concern, not every one will agree with us. So while congress debates the merits or problems with government spending we need not punish producers for producing in America. the fairtax fixes problems created though how we collect, not how much we spend.
California has been increasing in electoral votes after every census since its adoption as a state except for this last one where Texas gained while California stagnated.
The way I see it , the problem is not being able to understand anything you are saying in your video!!witch no one can.The problem is your hair Hello it is just nasty and very dirty for a youtube video howbout first wash it then cut the back to match the front or match the top would be more gooder just dadgum nasty ...Then come back lets talk about HR25 and were it might be and what we need to do to get it HR25 out from under all that paper work on Rrangle's Desk and back on the right track!
Prices will NOT rise with the FairTax, yet the government will be funded the same, and your purchasing power will rise. The FairTax will eliminate some $250 billion in wasted overhead costs. Illegals and criminals will finally contribute to the federal government. Yet the poverty level poor will completely be untaxed due to the prebate. The only loosers with the FairTax are politicians and the lobbyists who influence them. Let's make it happen.
The FairTax will raise the standard of living for all current tax payers. The amount we each pay will DROP because MORE people will be paying the total revenue neutral amount, including illegals and criminals. Also, prices will likely drop because companies will no longer need to pay tax experts and lawyers. This "compliance cost" right now amounts to $900 per person on average. Granted, SOME? people will benefit more than others, but there will be no loosers with the FairTax.
With our current tax system when you buy a gallon of milk you pay lots of hidden taxes. taxes on the farmer, fuel in the truck, truck driver that delivers the milk, taxes on the processing plant and all the employees that worked there taxes on the store where you by the milk and all of their employees. the point is all these Texas would be eliminated from the milk making it cheaper and then you would add the fair tax on. This would also help trade by putting taxes on foreign goods.
Buy And Read the book ( The FairTax Book ) It is explained! It shal not be implimented without the abolishmint of the Income tax!!And everyone will know what the taxes are, Politicians will be accountable, Unlike now, , Now they jst say Tax the rich! Who are the rich? Anyone that has more than you, The dumb masses!!
FICA is social security, not a tax. If you live longer than 65, you get that money back in regular monthly payments. I do believe a sales tax may help, but I believe taxing the rich proportionately to, say, what I pay every year would solve the problems with deficits. Plus, if we end corporate welfare as Nader and Ron Paul have called for. The problem is not taxes. It's who carries the largest burden.
Obviously you didn't read the bill or the book. Yes you would be paying additional sales tax on what you buy, but you would also receive a check from the government each month to cover the additional cost of food and other basic essentials. The check amount would be based on the number in your household. The bill abolishes the IRS and all income taxes. If you guys really want to discuss HR25 then don't waste our time lying about the bill. Companies would return to the US under this bill.
Its based on getting over a trillion dollars a year FROM the government -- in sales taxes the government PAYS itself.
Yes -- its THAT fuching stupid.
By getting MOST of the taxes FROM the government -- Fairtax claims their taxes wouldnt cost ANYTHING - cause all prices will go DOWN by the sales tax amount, So they can tax all the sales tax they want -- its FREE -- prices will go down!!! 2+2=5, therefore, I am the pope.
Do you realize how fuching stupid that is? To depend on EVERYONE donating 30% of their pay- back to whoever gave it to them?
EVERYONE .
Boortz admits his math doesn't work otherwise.
So guess what retard -- not everyone is going to donate 30% of their pay back. Almost not of you retards even know that's how their goofy math even works.
By the way, does your dumb ass know that for all the prices to go magically down -- as Boortz tells you retards has to happen -- that we all have to take huge pay cuts?
Thats right retard. Boortz himself wrote that for the fuching math to work -- everyone -- EVERYONE -- every fuchingone -- would have to "voluntarily" donate 30% of their pay to the employer.
Thats right retard. But he hides this shit way down in the fine print.
Like everyone is going to donate 30% to their employer.
Whoever is stupid enough to compare a 7 or 8 % state sales tax, with a 40-60% federal sales tax, is an idiot.
Fairtax not only would be huge -- it would be on things you idiots don't get taxed now -- like your RENT. Thats right, rent would be taxed under FT.
ALso - medical cost. Do you have 50K to pay in sales tax if you have a serioius illness or accident? Cause Fairtax math is based on collecting a huge sales tax on EVERY expendature, including medical.
We already pay a high tax on medical bills. It's just a hidden imbedded tax designed to not be seen. The embedded tax is working on you because you obviously cannot see that it's there. Every time money is spent, collected or earned, there is a tax. Hospitals pay taxes. They get the tax they owe from all of us and send it to the government. The Co. making the bone saw owes income tax and they collect it from the hospital they sell it to.
You know nothing about Fairtax. You don't know that FT books claims the government will pay MOST of its own taxes. Thats right - the government will PAY ITSELF almost a trillion a year, in taxes. And count that as income!
Where in the hello will the government GET the trillion to PAY itself. Thats not one time, thats EVERY YEAR. Forever.
Thats just the start of the Fairtax farce.
But if you don't understand Fairtax pretends the government will magically pay itself most of its own taxes.
"Real wages are 10.3%, 9.5%, and 9.2% higher in years 1, 10, and 25, respectively than would otherwise be the case. "-fairtaxorg
Ahhh, sounds great, doesn't it? But again, they are averaging all classes together -- let's look at the true picture:
Real wages of those making $10k-$150K up roughly 0.3 - 3.7%, real wages of those making less than $10k up roughly 13%, while the real wages of those making more than $150K is up nearly 50% (BHI, Table 5).
If you are just looking into the "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-inclusive aka "NaSTi"-- if you understand the difference between "marginal" and "effective" rates, look at the numbers, don't fall for the scam:
Current EFFECTIVE Federal rates for he middle classes- about 8-18%, and that INCLUDES all FICA and CIT. -- source, CBO
Effective federal rates of the FT/NST for the middle classes, 19%. --Beacon Hill Inst., FT supporters
Current effective federal rate of top20% = 26%. -- CBO
All taxes on labor, capital and all manufactured goods and services either directly take the wages of labor or are passed on in the price of the good which amounts to the same thing. A little known fact of economics is that a tax on land values cannot be passed on and that is why landowners hate property taxes that fall on land value. All govt. services increase land values so you have to ask why we don't tax land value to pay for those services. Non-landowneing workers would like to know.
LOL U MUST BE SLEEPY my slave friend;u pay tax righ now for u house,for u transportation ,for the clothes u wearing for u internet services for u fone services for u water services for u light for u food etc etc etc and on top of that u pay for work,i think we need to abolish all those tax laws ;and we solve our problems or nation problems trough cooperation,(money work,consultation,services etc )the goverment only job its to obey the desires of the people no to explot them
The scenario regarding the gallon of milk that I explained below applies to all goods and services. Everything you buy right now has those embedded taxes included in the price when you purchase that item or service; this includes houses, RV's medical expenses. Remove those embedded taxes and put in the fair tax and the price is right back where it was.
This is incorrect. The concept of "embedded taxes" is AN average across society of which the INCOME TAX amounts vary from person to person, from job to job, from products to products, as do the FICA amounts... plus the fact that neither CIT nor Estate Taxes are in any way "embedded" in the price of goods. The result, even most supporters agree, would be that prices would be up 10-25% on average when the tax is added on.
The "Fair" Tax=FAIL. It hammers the middle classes.
sorry but you are incorrect. embedded taxes are not a "concept" they are an everyday fact. did you say CIT has no effect on the price of goods and services? most supporters of the fair tax agree with you??? can you please give me the names of a few fair tax advocates who agree with you
It is a concept, an AVERAGE applied across all goods and services, and several of the taxes do NOT apply to the pricing of goods. The middle class man pays 8-18% effective federal taxes, this is his share of the "embedded taxes," whereas the wealthiest 1% pay 30% effective federal taxes. The 23% # is an AVERAGE.
When have estate taxes effected the price of anything? Since never. Since when has CIT ever factored into the price of goods? Since never, it is an aftereffect tax.
Income taxes and FICA are a part of wage costs for businesses, and WAGE COSTS ARE one thing used by businesses to reach the target pricing they need to be viable in the marketplace.
Again, think it through, CIT is an aftereffeect tax--
businesses don't say "hmmm, our corporate income taxes will be X dollars next year, so since we will sell exactly 1,000,000 widgets, we need to add x/1,000,000 to our price. No, instead they look at the market, estimate overhead, wages, etc., and estimate how many they can sell while covering their costs+, and then set a price hoping the market will accept it and yield them a profit.
THEN,if they have a profit, pay a minuscule CIT (on avg.)
no matter how you look at it CIT is an expense that corps have. it is figured into the price of their goods/services along with all other taxes and expenses. $20+ million in research along with many economic professors disagree with you.
I never said it was not an expense-- it is an AFTER SALES expense removed from PROFITS of stockholders, and as such does not effect the setting of prices much, if at all. Prices are set by the marketplace. And CIT is less than 2% of GDP.
Yes,there does arise a problem of double taxation...I am ALL FOR getting rid of the CIT on all profits which are disbursed to stockholders-- as long as the disbursed profits are taxed as taxable INCOME for stockholders and not capital gains. Reinvestment of profits is what it is all about.
What a higher CIT DOES do is encourage reinvestment of profits rather than disbursement of dividends, and such reinvestment serves often to LOWER prices in the marketplace through increased efficiency, etc.
"The oligopolistic corporation seeks to set prices at the point where profits are maximized (edit) any tax that directly affects costs (inventory taxes, payroll taxes, sales taxes, value-added taxes) can induce a change in prices designed to pass on as much of the tax as possible." (CONTINUED)
"But the corporate income tax is of a different kind; it doesn't directly affect either revenue or costs. It is calculated as a percentage of profits, and this is the key to understanding why the corporate income tax falls mainly on the rich..."-- Craig Medlen, Monthly Review
any business that does not reinvest in itself will be out of business in short order. the competitive market place is what keeps companies running efficiently, the reinvesting allows them to do so and is going to take place taxes or no taxes
lets take look at how the middle class get "hammered" under the fair tax when we get our paycheck we get 100% of that check (minus state/city taxes), should we get a bonus of say $2000 for safety, length of service whatever, we dont get $1300, we get $2000. we invest our hard earned money,at retirement we where able to save $500,000 we dont have $125000 confiscated we get the whole $500k. we get a raise of $2000 a year we get the whole $2000 not a portion. no compliance costs etc etc
You can post meaningless made up numbers until you are blue in the face, but fairtaxorgs OWN NUMBERS show that the middle classes would have a 10-100% increase in effecive federal taxes under an FT/NST, while the wealthiest 1% would have a 33%-50% tax cut on average. See the tables below, from the CBO and fairtaxorg, and you will understand how Boortz is tricking you.
"Fair" Tax = a tax cut for Paris Hilton, a gigantic tax hike for hotel maids.
You are arguing from a made up example against what the real world averages show--
You imagine that those making $50K pay 33% in federal taxes, and overall they do not, not even the average effective federal taxes of the top1% are that high... here are the real world numbers-- Historical Effective Federal Tax Rates:1979 to 2005, Congressional Budget Office , tinyurl 4g6kxk
well this is getting old, does a person that works their ass off and saves/invests into a 401k get all of their investment NO! huge portion is confiscated. when a person gets a raise to they get the whole raise NO! again a portion is confiscated. when a person gets a bonus do they get the whole bonus NO, more confiscated. each year do we have to pay either through $, time or both to comply whit h these insane taxes. what in here is meaningless or made up? still waiting on those names?
Any cash savings or ALREADDY-TAXED savings of anyone (especially senior citizens) would almost IMMEDIATELY go down in purchasing power if an FT/NST came into effect.
So, let's get this straight: somehwo, you think that the middle classes paying 19-22% in effective federal taxes under an FT/NST is better than the 8%-18% they pay now?
So since you are for the FT basically you are arguing that it is better to "confiscate" MORE from the middle classes.
the average rate at which the middle class is taxed on their income is about 15%,but that is just their income. you are leaving off property taxes, death taxes, everything you buy right now the price includes embedded taxes bring the price up, taxes on your savings, etc etc. putting us way over 20% federal taxes. under the fair tax our money/property is not confiscated, we decide when we are going to be paying taxes through our purchases. it is you that needs to look at the math.
the average rate at which the middle class is taxed on their income is about 15%,but that is just their income. you are leaving off property taxes, death taxes, everything you buy right now the price includes embedded taxes bring the price up, taxes on your savings, etc etc. putting us way over 20% federal taxes. under the fair tax our money/property is not confiscated, we decide when we are going to be paying taxes through our purchases. it is you that needs to look at the math.
the purchasing power of those that have saved and are retired will not be affected. prices will remain about the same. do you really favor this current (incomprehensible)tax system over the fair tax?
Prices will not remain the same. Estate Taxes, capital gains taxes, and CIT do not directly effect prices.
Example: if Warren Buffett keeps all 50million$ of his income rather than paying in $10million in taxes (a rough estimate of his situation a few years ago), how much will the price of insurance go down?
If you answered $0.00, give yourself a prize.
I defintely favor the current system if the only choices are it or FT/NST, as raising the midclasses taxes with FT is a bad idea.
we have already covered this ground. lets see i can go with your belief that prices will increase or i can go with several economic professors/economists and business people who say that prices will remain about the same hmmmm i am going with the later. just curious does your lively hood depend on this insane tax code that nobody understands yourself included as you didnt even think of adding in all fed taxes paid in your last msg yeah keep thinking you are only paying 15% fed taxes
My point exactly-- he earns his income from Berkshire Hathaway fund (major insurance holdings).Again, if he didn't have to pay in that 10mill$ in taxes, and the FT/NST is REVENUE NEUTRAL, that $10mill has to be gotten from somewhere*. You are arguing that all federal taxes collected effect retail prices (are "embedded"), and this clearly shows that NOT ALL EFFECT THE RETAIL PRICE OF ITEMS... thus prices will very clearly go up after the tax of 23%i/30% is added on.
Name one "professors/economists" who says prices will stay the same or nearly the same, and point us to his numbers.
And I can't tell if you are dense or just playing the part on YouTube, but, as I have stated repeatedly, the 8-18% middle class figures from CBO include ALL INCOME TAXES, ALL FICA (employee AND employer), ALL CIT, and ALL EXCISE TAXES.
You really need to look at the numbers, since you clearly have not-- go to the CBO and fairtax org links and read.
if all persons/companies that sold insurance or anything for that matter then yes the price would go down. i am ending our debate it has been fun but we are now going in circles
CIT along with all other taxes do affect prices, with those taxes removed the competitive market place will bring the prices down. and then there is also tax compliance costs. people infinitely more knowledgeable than myself say the same thing
Now the guy that has saved his whole life to buy that RV or house for $100,000 the price after fair tax is going to be right about $100,000. so this guy takes his $100,000 out of his 401k at age 67 (take it any sooner and he will have to pay penalties) to buy his rv he has to pay taxes on that $100K now he is only left with about $77000 what a great deal!!! He is going to have to work a few more years to buy that RV or house. Under the fair tax he keeps every penny that he worked his but off for
Through your vocabulary you have established yourself as childish and dense, I am sure that you have many other qualities that are as equally appealing. You also are obviously tethered to the end of the government leash. Taking all this into consideration I could care less about your little opinion, feel free to use any immature adjective you so desire to describe me I do not care. I will not waste one more syllable on you.
. as would the price of everything else. but now add the fair tax and we are pretty close to the original price of that gallon of milk. this applies to just about everything that we now buy. but here is the kicker there were no federal taxes taken from your check
This shows you are very confused about the math-- the taxes removed from paychecks are part of the supposed "embedded" taxes-- if everyeon gets their grosspay, prices will rise dramatically when you add the FT on, because the middle classes wil get 8-18% (their effective federal tax rate) more takehome, and the wealthiest 20% will get 26% more takehome, and both groups new effective rate will average around 19% (this is from supporters' own numbers-- see Beacon Hill papers).
just to get you started how about property taxes the farmer has to pay,employment taxes on his workers, every piece of equipment that farmer buys is taxed, all the money the farmer makes is taxed, same goes for the transportation of that milk as well as the distributors of that gallon of milk. if all taxes were removed would you not agree that the price of that gallon of milk would go down? ok so all the above taxes are removed the price of that gallon of milk goes down.
Our country did not survive the first 100 years IT THRIVED!!!
every item than we now buy has embedded taxes. You mentioned a gallon of milk, by the time that gallon of milk get to the store where you can buy it how much do you think the cost of that milk is taxes (about 23%)?
s the FT/NST "progressive" or "regressive"? Here is the quote from one of the Beacon Hill treatises on the AFT site:
"The key result of the foregoing discussion is that it matters fundamentally how one frames the discussion of the distributional effects of the FairTax. When people are sorted by expenditure per capita, the FairTax is progressive; when they are sorted by income per capita, it is regressive."
Those who undertand what this means now understand what a bad idea the FT/NST is.
Fairtax is a 35% tax on ALL cancer patients, ALL nursing home patients, ALL renters.
Its on all RENT, all Utilities, even all insurance premiums.
A person could easily get 50,000 in taxes, if he gets high medical cost, and only make 30,000. This is a nut job bogus plan.
GOD almighty I want to see you folks try to tax the parents of a child with leukemia 70,000 dollars. Explain how that's voluntary, and how the "prebate" will make it all work out.
Supporters will argue that folks can legally avoid the FT/NST-- but the problem is that, to be "revenue neutral," the rate will have to be raised if avoidance is too high, and this hammers the middle class.
Ohh you liberals are all the same. You want to make sure the Govt keeps their fingers in everybody's wallet. That isn't freedom, its economic slavery.
albyva -- for your sake, I hope they pass it. Then you can tell us about it, when they tax your rent. When they tax your insurance payments. When they tax your medical cost. IF you ever get a serious disease, and your insurance pays 100K -- guess who gets to pay 30K in tax, bro? You dummy. You better learn this is a bogus nonsense piece of crapola. Its hogwash, its stupid, its magic pills for your gas tank.
I will never be in favor of giving Paris Hilton a tax cut while raising taxes on the average carpenter-- and that is exactly what the FT/NST would do.
You stupid liberal, you forget that your income goes up under the fair tax. You take home 100% of your paycheck. So what if milk goes up $1.00, you are taking home more money. And you only pay taxes when you consume, not when you earn. Income Tax is like Slavery. Master gets his cut 1st, then you get yours.
Lol-- another person who fell for the "100% of your paycheck" disengenuous wording.
This has been explained repeatedly, the FIT and FICA are part of the embedded taxes-- if your employer doesn't cut your wages by these ampunts, prices will go up, making the amount you take home essentially have THE SAME purchasing power as the amount you take home now.
Income Tax(especially a FlatIT with base deduction) is a logical gauge of how one benefits from society's USE of taxes-- Spending is NOT.
The Fairtax isn't about increasing a person's purchasing power. Its about shifting taxation from being Regressive to Progressive. No Taxes on Income or Investments. Capital Gains Taxes, Death Taxes, Inheritance Taxes, Savings-Income Tax, etc are all abolished. You are ONLY taxed when you purchase something. And only when that something is (NEW). If you by a NEW Car you pay the 23%. If you buy a Used Car you pay 0% in Federal Taxes. Why? Because the person who bought it new already paid the tax.
The "Fair" aka "NaSTI" tax is regressive across income-- FT site's own numbers show this, Beacon Hill admits it in one of their treatises, and any honest economist will tell you this.
By the numbers (SUITS, etc.) the "fair" tax is MORE REGRESSIVE than the current income tax-- and the income tax has been MADE more regressive mainly by CONSERVATIVE administrations over the last 27 years.
Huckabee wants to make taxes even MORE regressive (lowering the marginal rate).
And the more people avoid items that are taxed, the higher the rate will have to be to remain "revenue neutral"... and who can avoid it easily with large sums of money by, say, purchasing a "used" apt. building in Manhattan, or a castle in Germany? The extremely wealthy, who will thus end up paying MUCH less under an FT/NST.
You can't avoid the tax when everything you consume is taxed. Case and point, the Sales Tax of most states. Try buying something without paying sales tax. A state wide sales tax is the exact same thing as a Fair Tax. After a home has been initially purchased, there is no more tax to pay, even if its resold 1000x times. Taxing Income is Regressive, Taxing Consumption is Progresive. And before 1913, we actually had no income tax, and America worked just fine.
Except "used" items and items purchased outside of the USA and not brought here are not taxed under the National Sales Tax, remember... so when the wealthy buy larger, "used" mansions and rental properties here and chateaus to live in in the Alps with their nontaxed income, who has to make up the difference to keep the tax "revenue neutral"-- who HAS to buy their food and electricity and water and medicine mostly within our borders? That's right, the middle classes.
Simple solution, tax exports. Then it doesn't matter what they do outside the US, the tax was already paid. As for Used Mansions, so what. There are but so many Used Mansions to go around. Before long, Demand will exceed supply and new Mansions will need to be built. But the same for the Middle Class. They to will by used, until there are no used homes to meet demand. The rich still need utilities like the rest of us, so they'll pay their fair share.
"Tax exports" of what? Money? Buying a castle in Germany takes money, and it takes non-taxed money out of the US economy under the FT/NST. And no new mansion will need to be built, they can just buy extra, "vacation" mansions in other parts of the world.
The point is, if the very wealthy lower how much tax they pay under the FT/NST just a small percentage, say 10%, it is a large amount, and has to be made up for somehow-- and that somewhow? Raising the rate, which hammers the middle classes.
The Middle Class or any Class doesn't get hammered until they purchase something. That is the beauty of the Fair Tax. You Pay when you Consume, Not when you earn. Taxing earning is a form of slavery. Most people work from Jan-April for the Government to pay their taxes. Then in May they actually start earning money for themselves. And if a Fairtax leads to fewer Govt dollars, then SO BE IT. The Govt will just have to adjust its Spending Downward.
The middle class HAS to eat. The more the tax is avoided by everyone, the higher the rate has to be, and the more the middle class is hammered.
The supporters' economists, to try and twist the numbers to favor the FT, look at it over time and assume that people at the top spend MORE than their annual income on taxed items, in effect spending savings on taxed items. Not bloody likely.
Plus they count on the babyboomers spending all their savings pre-death (mainly on medical expenses).
From what I can see there would be a big rush on higher priced items (new cars, big TV's and so on) just before this national sales tax would go into effect. Then there would be a long stretch where new items would not be selling under the fair tax. How could this be good for the ecconomy? Plus for a while the new items will still have the current embeded taxes in there cost plus the national sales tax.
Its an initial pain for long term gain. So if we all get screwed in the beginning, so what. It'll all benefit everybody in the end and hundreds of years from now. Earn every nickel you deserve. Only pay taxes when you consume. And thats consume something "new".
I wish FT would work as advertised. But The math is absurd. It cant even be passed as planned - nursing homes would demand and get exemptions. Cancer patients would demand and get exemptions. Miltary, new home sales, renters, there would be a parade of lobbyist CORRECTLY demanding exemptions. The 23 would be 40-50%, and you would have huge compliance problems. It just wont work.
jim, I will get the book asap, but it cant possibly answer some. For example, since nursing home patients will have to be taxed 14,000 a year or more, on their care, how will FT help them, since they dont get a paycheck. And the "savings" to the nursing home would be about a 3,000.
You researched this plan? Really, how? What is your research about renters when suddenly they pay 23% sales tax on rent. When nursing homes charge 23% more, when cancer patients pay 23% more for care? What research did you do on a 23% tax on new homes? Why would anyone buy a 300K new home,with a 23% sales tax? They would buy a used home, and the new housing market goes belly up. You folks didnt research ship.
What's even funnier are the people who claim the following
1) "You can take home your whole paycheck!"
and yet, they claim
2)"Retail prices will drop 23% because the embedded taxes will be gone"
Here's a hint-- if you take home your whole paycheck, those embedded TAXES may be "gone" but the embedded COST is still there for the company. So removing FIT doesn't do much to lower the cost of goods if the employer still has to outlay the same $ as they would with FIT.
Joegod -- yes,good point. But the embeded cost will still be there. THis is lunacy. Taxes will still be paid -- actually MORE taxes --but anyway, taxes will still be paid by everyone along the line. THere will still be the cost of taxes passes along, just like before, only, sales tax, not income tax.
Piecemeal, the FairTax doesn't work. There are 4 pieces:
1- The sales tax is 23%, using the same basis as our income tax.
2- Income and corp. taxes are gone.
3- Taxes hidden in prices, 22%, gone. Add the FairTax and prices are unchanged.
4- Every citizen gets a Prebate, nullifying the FairTax on necessities.
Put together, prices are unchanged. Plus you get to keep all that you've earned! You are taxed only when you spend. Sounded too-good-to-be-true so I bought The Fair Tax Book.
NO -- the high national sales tax would ALSO have constitutional amendment to stop income tax. This high national sales tax is idiotic -- insane - cause it would be 30-40% on cars, houses, medical cost, dental visits. We would have a catastrophic drop is sales -- try to grasp this.
A high national sales tax would be absurd -- it would be on houses- cars -- food -- medical operations. It would destroy the real estate industry and the auto industry -- in a month. Its crazy. It doesnt even slow down at stupid. A high national sales tax is so so so stupid - lets do it, to show the morons how dumb it is.
Those agreeing with this idea are blindly ignorant.
People actually expect us to not only have the funds for Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare but to pay out "monthly reimbursements" to every tax payer.
Ron Paul wants to replace the income tax with...... NOTHING! His plan is to reduce government spending to that of just a decade ago, then we could eliminate the IRS and replace them with nothing!! FUCK YOU IRS!
You confuse me... most of your concerns have nothing to do with the fairtax idea, such as razing taxis on individual products.. in the fiartax concept all new products are taxed at the same 23%
It's something the supporters of this need to know; There is the Fair Tax Book and there is the Fair Tax Bill. I'm talking about the bill, which is far different from what Neal Boortz & John Linder wrote.
the fairtax is REVENUE nuetral, not EXPENDITURE neutral. the amount ppl pay is dramatically reduced while the gov rev is the same. this is the only way congress would ever pass tax reform. the fairtax eliminates the hidden embedded taxes thus making gov more efficient. you should educate yourself. read.
revenue neutral - are you nuts? When you tax a car or house 40% -- you are going to get a lot less sales. Helloo ----- figure it out. Sales would go to as low as possible, ruining the economy. This is the dumbest idea I have ever heard. WE need to enact it, just so people can find out how dumb it is.
"every new movement or manifestation of human activity, when unfamilliar in peoples minds, is sure to be misunderstood and misinterpreted" - edward carpenter
Obviously you don't know the Fair Tax book and the actual HR 25 Bill do not match in facts. Everything I said had to do with the bill they tried to pass in Congress.
An income tax or any substitute is not needed period. It is an illusion that this tax pays for goods and services provided by the government. The Fair Tax people seem to be well intentioned, but lack a fundamental understanding of how the government is actually funded. Read 'The creature from Jekyll Island'.
How? It eliminates government's ability to hide tax hikes, it brings everything out in the open and makes our "representatives" liable for their actions and decisions. The bottom earners in this country would have their tax burdens eliminated by the prebate. ANYONE earning up to $26,500 per year would effectively pay no taxes.
Wow! Have you been stalking me to know what I have and have not been doing? If so, perhaps I should file for an arrest warrant and restraining order against you. Or you can admit you have no clue what I have or not been doing and that you lied about me (committed slander) to make a point. Either way, it cheapens your argument if you need to lie to reinforce it.
You are factually incorrect about the FairTax impact on price structure.
You neglect to mention the FairTax impact on wage rates.
Your milk example is wrong.
Nothing stops congress now from having both taxes...but we don't.
Nothing stops congress now from picking and choosing winning and losing participants in the tax code. In fact, that is a current problem that would be more easily fixed under the FairTax.
Right... and we can only trust Ron Paul to bring the size of govenment to a level that allows for a sustainable reduction in its income. He will also work to remove the "inflation tax" and curtail spending like no other.
They should not TAX necessities like food, clothing, prescription medications AND THEN expect us to simply not purchase those necessities when money gets tight.
They should ALSO NOT tax the retirement benefits of Seniors that have spent their life paying taxes for Social Security, just to get that income and have it taxed AGAIN.
First, the FairTax rebate reimburses one for taxes on necessities. It's better to do it this way because it only allows the rich to be exempted on necessities up to the poverty level instead of all food, clothing, etc. Second, the FairTax does NOT tax retirement benefits as they are taxed now.
A) the Fair Tax plain is to REPEAL the 16th Amendment which would take away the governments ability to tax income.
B) you'll still be able to afford your milk. With the elimination of the income tax you will have a lot more money. If you are in lower class economically, making $30,000 or less a year you will not be tax on "necessary goods" such as groceries.
Not to mention Corporation taxes will not exist, thus the price of milk will naturally lower.
The reason for $3,85 milk is the 20 to 30% of hidden taxes that corporations pass on in the price of their products, after the fairtax you will pay about the same for milk and pay it with 100% of your pay instead of the after tax paycheck you have now.
I agree to some point, especially on Big oil, but in a free market society, especially retail, competition will force prices down to their lowest common denominator. I am a small business owner and I added up that I spend $8000 per year of time and money on taxes out of the $100,000 in annual sales. That is not including the hidden taxes in the products I buy to resell.
If only we were truely living in a "free market". America is a managed economy, so the claim that prices will lower isn't a guarantee. I go with the evidence at hand, so I can't agree with their theory.
Look at products & services which are already set by the government; we're paying more than the rest of the world for several products.
Should we trust lobbyists & special interest groups to push our Federal & State Governments to lower the prices of their goods ?
Because the cost came from the "build price". How do people not know this stuff ? As computer companies made improvements on their build costs, they were able to lower prices for the consumer market. Before hand they only sold to corporations and government agencies. They have to set a margin of affordability before it's made public. Now that they're selling PC at $499; What REASON would they need to lower it further ? None.
j0eg0d: I think that you are into conspiracy gremlins too much. Yes, we need to be watchful for cartels, but most corporations are indeed competitive. Driven by the free market, they are forced to bring down prices when their costs goes down.
Removing FIT, coprorate tax, inheritance tax, and SStaxes costs will not reduce RETAIL prices by anywhere near 23%, especially on goods manufactured in China.
With a "Fair" tax, prices would go up significantly.
Ask someone who has owned a retail store to explain this to you if you don't see why this is true.
Diskatopia: You are correct in principle in so far that the pricing of imported goods will respond to a different model. Understanding this model is beyond my skill, but I suspect that only the embedded wholesaler/retailer taxes will be eliminated. However, the prices are still subject to local competition. The net effect will probably raise prices on imported goods, making US produced goods more attractive.
No, that is not true.. again FIT/CIT and SS/FICA are very small parts of US retail prices, and those are the only taxes removed under the "Fair" tax bill. COL wages in China, India, Mexico, Indonesia, etc., are so much lower than in the USA that removing those taxes here will hardly change US production costs enough to make us labor-competitive.
See, here's the rub-- even assuming that somehow, even with the new costs of about 450billion as "prebate," those "embedded tax cost" cuts keep prices the same when the inclusive NST is added, that means people have to get the same paycheck they do now-- otherwise those embedded costs are still there for the employer, and prices go up.
Dude. SPOT ON. No "Tax" is ever fair so the nomenclature itself ought to raise our suspicions..
BTW, I defended your comment on Huckabees original video against two other people after they asked you "the difference" since the "$3.85" for milk is "already taxed" .. and they are correct-- THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. What a fucking scam.
Keep supporting ron paul. What a revolutionary idea to replace the IRS with NOTHING! :)
I disagree with some of your points, but I think you made a very good video. I disagree but am more open to your ideas then I might have been before you made this. Good vid.
Interesting comments. Some points. If congress wants to bring back the income tax in addition to the Fair Tax, it will have to bring back the IRS and April 15. Prices will not go up 30% because we un-tax corporate income and employer payroll, and we remove compliance costs. 11-17% is more realistic. Working people will have 30% more take-home pay, so their purchasing power will be greater. If Congress wants to increase taxes, everybody will see it. That's healthy! ~Jim
In point the Internal Revenue Service won't acually be going anywhere - it'll simply be under a different agency, and we will still need to keep receipts in case of their audits. It's stated in the 'HR 25 Bill'.
Also, I wouldn't trust the majority of corporations to lower their prices. It's business thinking to make high-profit. Such industries will imagine Americans having more cash savings and I'd say they'd raise prices to capitalize on that.
Under the bill the IRS, with 100,000 employees, will be replaced with a Sales Tax Bureau and an Excise Tax Bureau under Treasury, 5,000 employees. The states, in most cases, will collect the tax.
True, free-market theory is that people act in their own self-interest. However in Dec 1995 Congress forgot to renew an airline ticket tax. After one month prices dropped to their 1995 level w/o tax. When Congress remembered what it had forgotten, prices returned to their 1995 level w. tax. ~Jim
You're getting that from websites and NOT the Fair Tax Act proposal.
READ HR 25 Section 101(d):
(1)The person using or consuming taxable property or services in the United States is liable for the tax imposed by this section, except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection.
(2) EXCEPTION WHERE TAX PAID TO SELLER - A person using or consuming a taxable property or service in the United States is not liable for the tax imposed by this section if the person pays the tax to a person selling the taxable property or service and receives from such person a purchaser's receipt within the meaning of section 510.
In other words, you, not the seller, are liable for the sales tax. Meaning we better keep our receipts in case of audit.
since day one to today congress had special taxes on certain things. they are called excise taxes. This wont change under the fairtax, although after switching to the fairtax I would like to see those excise taxes eliminated raising all revenue though use taxes a single national retail sales tax. Lets get rid of income taxes first and pass the fairtax, then lets deal with excise taxes, and tax everything the same.
dtvgmedia 11 months ago
Milk will not increase in price. Any inventory the farmer, or store may have receives a 23% transitional tax credit that removes the embedded cost of prior income taxes. New purchases of supplies material or equipment will cost 23% less with no embedded tax. adding a 23% inclusive or 30% exclusive tax at the point of end user consumption will bring the price back to the same as it was before the fairtax minus income tax compliance cost.
dtvgmedia 11 months ago
After switching to a 23% inclusive revenue neutral tax prices remain the same. Furthermore the rebate makes sure that no family pays taxes on their poverty level spending.
dtvgmedia 11 months ago
One might complain that government taxes too much, but if it eliminated all taxes, the problem would become apparent that it is government spending that is the real problem you and i have. But while you and i might share this concern, not every one will agree with us. So while congress debates the merits or problems with government spending we need not punish producers for producing in America. the fairtax fixes problems created though how we collect, not how much we spend.
dtvgmedia 11 months ago
California has been increasing in electoral votes after every census since its adoption as a state except for this last one where Texas gained while California stagnated.
dtvgmedia 11 months ago
The way I see it , the problem is not being able to understand anything you are saying in your video!!witch no one can.The problem is your hair Hello it is just nasty and very dirty for a youtube video howbout first wash it then cut the back to match the front or match the top would be more gooder just dadgum nasty ...Then come back lets talk about HR25 and were it might be and what we need to do to get it HR25 out from under all that paper work on Rrangle's Desk and back on the right track!
baileyslip 1 year ago
Prices will NOT rise with the FairTax, yet the government will be funded the same, and your purchasing power will rise. The FairTax will eliminate some $250 billion in wasted overhead costs. Illegals and criminals will finally contribute to the federal government. Yet the poverty level poor will completely be untaxed due to the prebate. The only loosers with the FairTax are politicians and the lobbyists who influence them. Let's make it happen.
urgener 1 year ago
The FairTax will raise the standard of living for all current tax payers. The amount we each pay will DROP because MORE people will be paying the total revenue neutral amount, including illegals and criminals. Also, prices will likely drop because companies will no longer need to pay tax experts and lawyers. This "compliance cost" right now amounts to $900 per person on average. Granted, SOME? people will benefit more than others, but there will be no loosers with the FairTax.
urgener 1 year ago
With our current tax system when you buy a gallon of milk you pay lots of hidden taxes. taxes on the farmer, fuel in the truck, truck driver that delivers the milk, taxes on the processing plant and all the employees that worked there taxes on the store where you by the milk and all of their employees. the point is all these Texas would be eliminated from the milk making it cheaper and then you would add the fair tax on. This would also help trade by putting taxes on foreign goods.
mike1234ontv 1 year ago
Buy And Read the book ( The FairTax Book ) It is explained! It shal not be implimented without the abolishmint of the Income tax!!And everyone will know what the taxes are, Politicians will be accountable, Unlike now, , Now they jst say Tax the rich! Who are the rich? Anyone that has more than you, The dumb masses!!
flmcon 1 year ago
FICA is social security, not a tax. If you live longer than 65, you get that money back in regular monthly payments. I do believe a sales tax may help, but I believe taxing the rich proportionately to, say, what I pay every year would solve the problems with deficits. Plus, if we end corporate welfare as Nader and Ron Paul have called for. The problem is not taxes. It's who carries the largest burden.
peacelf 2 years ago
Obviously you didn't read the bill or the book. Yes you would be paying additional sales tax on what you buy, but you would also receive a check from the government each month to cover the additional cost of food and other basic essentials. The check amount would be based on the number in your household. The bill abolishes the IRS and all income taxes. If you guys really want to discuss HR25 then don't waste our time lying about the bill. Companies would return to the US under this bill.
AMXBOY 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fairtax is based on pure bullshit..
Its based on getting over a trillion dollars a year FROM the government -- in sales taxes the government PAYS itself.
Yes -- its THAT fuching stupid.
By getting MOST of the taxes FROM the government -- Fairtax claims their taxes wouldnt cost ANYTHING - cause all prices will go DOWN by the sales tax amount, So they can tax all the sales tax they want -- its FREE -- prices will go down!!! 2+2=5, therefore, I am the pope.
Its the same logic.
BullshipDetector 2 years ago
So fairtax boils down to piles of shit.
One pile of shit is FT making the government pay itself a trillioin a year in sales tax.
The other pile of shit is FT basing its math on everyone donating 30% of their pay back to their employer.
There are other piles of shit -- its all bullshit. But if you can't tell its bullshit by these two piles I just mentioned -- you never will grasp it.
MarkDouglasC 2 years ago
Do you realize how fuching stupid that is? To depend on EVERYONE donating 30% of their pay- back to whoever gave it to them?
EVERYONE .
Boortz admits his math doesn't work otherwise.
So guess what retard -- not everyone is going to donate 30% of their pay back. Almost not of you retards even know that's how their goofy math even works.
Its a bunch of crap -- Fairtax is bogus bullshit.
MarkDouglasC 2 years ago
By the way, does your dumb ass know that for all the prices to go magically down -- as Boortz tells you retards has to happen -- that we all have to take huge pay cuts?
Thats right retard. Boortz himself wrote that for the fuching math to work -- everyone -- EVERYONE -- every fuchingone -- would have to "voluntarily" donate 30% of their pay to the employer.
Thats right retard. But he hides this shit way down in the fine print.
Like everyone is going to donate 30% to their employer.
MarkDouglasC 2 years ago
No retard -- Fairtax gets rid of embedded taxes. Instantly and forever said Boortz
Then you dumb asses want the poor and everyone else to pay them anyway. But never mind that, you are too stupid to see the bullshit there.
But even your dumb ass should realize the government can't fuching pay itself a trillion dollars in sales tax retard.
Why the fuch do you think JCT reported that a national sales tax to replace all other taxes would have to be 60% or more?
Fairtax is a farce idiot
MarkDouglasC 2 years ago
You people who THINK you want a high federal sales tax would bitch and moan if it ever passed.
Do you really want a 50-60% sales tax on your rent, your beer, your porn, your car insurance?
Thats right - all that would have to pay the lunatic sales tax.
Fairtax math only works if pigs fly.
Fairtax is like saying 2+2=5, therefore I'm the pope.
Bullshit.
MarkDouglasC 2 years ago
Whoever is stupid enough to compare a 7 or 8 % state sales tax, with a 40-60% federal sales tax, is an idiot.
Fairtax not only would be huge -- it would be on things you idiots don't get taxed now -- like your RENT. Thats right, rent would be taxed under FT.
ALso - medical cost. Do you have 50K to pay in sales tax if you have a serioius illness or accident? Cause Fairtax math is based on collecting a huge sales tax on EVERY expendature, including medical.
Figure it out - FT is BS
MarkDouglasC 2 years ago
We already pay a high tax on medical bills. It's just a hidden imbedded tax designed to not be seen. The embedded tax is working on you because you obviously cannot see that it's there. Every time money is spent, collected or earned, there is a tax. Hospitals pay taxes. They get the tax they owe from all of us and send it to the government. The Co. making the bone saw owes income tax and they collect it from the hospital they sell it to.
jboritzki 2 years ago
You know nothing about Fairtax. You don't know that FT books claims the government will pay MOST of its own taxes. Thats right - the government will PAY ITSELF almost a trillion a year, in taxes. And count that as income!
Where in the hello will the government GET the trillion to PAY itself. Thats not one time, thats EVERY YEAR. Forever.
Thats just the start of the Fairtax farce.
But if you don't understand Fairtax pretends the government will magically pay itself most of its own taxes.
MarkDouglasC 3 years ago
Comment removed
MarkDouglasC 3 years ago
Joseph, I believe you may really like this web site.
w w w truthattack . o r g. Americans are beginning to come around albeit a little slow. Never the less, congress will NEVER do the right thing.
almartin77 3 years ago
just to be sure is texas sales tax 8% or did it change
cobraopts7 3 years ago
Our wealthiest States as of January 1, 2008:
6.25% in Texas
7.25% in California
None in Alaska
j0eg0d 3 years ago
"Real wages are 10.3%, 9.5%, and 9.2% higher in years 1, 10, and 25, respectively than would otherwise be the case. "-fairtaxorg
Ahhh, sounds great, doesn't it? But again, they are averaging all classes together -- let's look at the true picture:
Real wages of those making $10k-$150K up roughly 0.3 - 3.7%, real wages of those making less than $10k up roughly 13%, while the real wages of those making more than $150K is up nearly 50% (BHI, Table 5).
"Fair" Tax = FAIL.
Diskwin 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If you are just looking into the "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-inclusive aka "NaSTi"-- if you understand the difference between "marginal" and "effective" rates, look at the numbers, don't fall for the scam:
Current EFFECTIVE Federal rates for he middle classes- about 8-18%, and that INCLUDES all FICA and CIT. -- source, CBO
Effective federal rates of the FT/NST for the middle classes, 19%. --Beacon Hill Inst., FT supporters
Current effective federal rate of top20% = 26%. -- CBO
Diskwin 3 years ago
All taxes on labor, capital and all manufactured goods and services either directly take the wages of labor or are passed on in the price of the good which amounts to the same thing. A little known fact of economics is that a tax on land values cannot be passed on and that is why landowners hate property taxes that fall on land value. All govt. services increase land values so you have to ask why we don't tax land value to pay for those services. Non-landowneing workers would like to know.
ourearthhome 3 years ago
Employee costs effect the price of goods, services & profit far more than the taxation of it. It's why economies prosper under cheap labor.
Local land value is dependent on city growth. It's why property value rises when big industries move into the area.
The (local) taxation of property is based on this too, but the FEDERAL taxation is managed & rated by what the land is being used for.
That's why you see huge tax breaks for industrial but not for farms, rentals, or residential properties.
j0eg0d 3 years ago
LOL U MUST BE SLEEPY my slave friend;u pay tax righ now for u house,for u transportation ,for the clothes u wearing for u internet services for u fone services for u water services for u light for u food etc etc etc and on top of that u pay for work,i think we need to abolish all those tax laws ;and we solve our problems or nation problems trough cooperation,(money work,consultation,services etc )the goverment only job its to obey the desires of the people no to explot them
nosupecualponerme 3 years ago
Gallon of milk my ass.
What about a guy who makes 30K a year, but his wife gets cancer. You morons would tax him 60,000 in SALES tax on her surgery and chemo.
What about a guy that saved his whole life for a new house or RV? You morons would tax him 100,000, even though he only made 30K.
YOu folks are blathering idiots, and you would scream bloody murder if this passed and you had to pay these idiotic taxes.
FT would be the WORLDS HIGHEST sales tax.
MakeMyPower 3 years ago
The scenario regarding the gallon of milk that I explained below applies to all goods and services. Everything you buy right now has those embedded taxes included in the price when you purchase that item or service; this includes houses, RV's medical expenses. Remove those embedded taxes and put in the fair tax and the price is right back where it was.
bigdog1064 3 years ago
This is incorrect. The concept of "embedded taxes" is AN average across society of which the INCOME TAX amounts vary from person to person, from job to job, from products to products, as do the FICA amounts... plus the fact that neither CIT nor Estate Taxes are in any way "embedded" in the price of goods. The result, even most supporters agree, would be that prices would be up 10-25% on average when the tax is added on.
The "Fair" Tax=FAIL. It hammers the middle classes.
Diskwin 3 years ago
sorry but you are incorrect. embedded taxes are not a "concept" they are an everyday fact. did you say CIT has no effect on the price of goods and services? most supporters of the fair tax agree with you??? can you please give me the names of a few fair tax advocates who agree with you
bigdog1064 3 years ago
It is a concept, an AVERAGE applied across all goods and services, and several of the taxes do NOT apply to the pricing of goods. The middle class man pays 8-18% effective federal taxes, this is his share of the "embedded taxes," whereas the wealthiest 1% pay 30% effective federal taxes. The 23% # is an AVERAGE.
When have estate taxes effected the price of anything? Since never. Since when has CIT ever factored into the price of goods? Since never, it is an aftereffect tax.
Income taxes are
Diskwin 3 years ago
Income taxes and FICA are a part of wage costs for businesses, and WAGE COSTS ARE one thing used by businesses to reach the target pricing they need to be viable in the marketplace.
Diskwin 3 years ago
Again, think it through, CIT is an aftereffeect tax--
businesses don't say "hmmm, our corporate income taxes will be X dollars next year, so since we will sell exactly 1,000,000 widgets, we need to add x/1,000,000 to our price. No, instead they look at the market, estimate overhead, wages, etc., and estimate how many they can sell while covering their costs+, and then set a price hoping the market will accept it and yield them a profit.
THEN,if they have a profit, pay a minuscule CIT (on avg.)
Diskwin 3 years ago
no matter how you look at it CIT is an expense that corps have. it is figured into the price of their goods/services along with all other taxes and expenses. $20+ million in research along with many economic professors disagree with you.
bigdog1064 3 years ago
I never said it was not an expense-- it is an AFTER SALES expense removed from PROFITS of stockholders, and as such does not effect the setting of prices much, if at all. Prices are set by the marketplace. And CIT is less than 2% of GDP.
Diskwin 3 years ago
Yes,there does arise a problem of double taxation...I am ALL FOR getting rid of the CIT on all profits which are disbursed to stockholders-- as long as the disbursed profits are taxed as taxable INCOME for stockholders and not capital gains. Reinvestment of profits is what it is all about.
Diskwin 3 years ago
What a higher CIT DOES do is encourage reinvestment of profits rather than disbursement of dividends, and such reinvestment serves often to LOWER prices in the marketplace through increased efficiency, etc.
Diskwin 3 years ago
"The oligopolistic corporation seeks to set prices at the point where profits are maximized (edit) any tax that directly affects costs (inventory taxes, payroll taxes, sales taxes, value-added taxes) can induce a change in prices designed to pass on as much of the tax as possible." (CONTINUED)
Continued
Diskwin 3 years ago
"But the corporate income tax is of a different kind; it doesn't directly affect either revenue or costs. It is calculated as a percentage of profits, and this is the key to understanding why the corporate income tax falls mainly on the rich..."-- Craig Medlen, Monthly Review
Diskwin 3 years ago
any business that does not reinvest in itself will be out of business in short order. the competitive market place is what keeps companies running efficiently, the reinvesting allows them to do so and is going to take place taxes or no taxes
bigdog1064 3 years ago
lets take look at how the middle class get "hammered" under the fair tax when we get our paycheck we get 100% of that check (minus state/city taxes), should we get a bonus of say $2000 for safety, length of service whatever, we dont get $1300, we get $2000. we invest our hard earned money,at retirement we where able to save $500,000 we dont have $125000 confiscated we get the whole $500k. we get a raise of $2000 a year we get the whole $2000 not a portion. no compliance costs etc etc
bigdog1064 3 years ago
You can post meaningless made up numbers until you are blue in the face, but fairtaxorgs OWN NUMBERS show that the middle classes would have a 10-100% increase in effecive federal taxes under an FT/NST, while the wealthiest 1% would have a 33%-50% tax cut on average. See the tables below, from the CBO and fairtaxorg, and you will understand how Boortz is tricking you.
"Fair" Tax = a tax cut for Paris Hilton, a gigantic tax hike for hotel maids.
Diskwin 3 years ago
what in my last msg is meaningless and made up. and where are all these fair tax supporters that agree with you
bigdog1064 3 years ago
You are arguing from a made up example against what the real world averages show--
You imagine that those making $50K pay 33% in federal taxes, and overall they do not, not even the average effective federal taxes of the top1% are that high... here are the real world numbers-- Historical Effective Federal Tax Rates:1979 to 2005, Congressional Budget Office , tinyurl 4g6kxk
Diskwin 3 years ago
well this is getting old, does a person that works their ass off and saves/invests into a 401k get all of their investment NO! huge portion is confiscated. when a person gets a raise to they get the whole raise NO! again a portion is confiscated. when a person gets a bonus do they get the whole bonus NO, more confiscated. each year do we have to pay either through $, time or both to comply whit h these insane taxes. what in here is meaningless or made up? still waiting on those names?
bigdog1064 3 years ago
Any cash savings or ALREADDY-TAXED savings of anyone (especially senior citizens) would almost IMMEDIATELY go down in purchasing power if an FT/NST came into effect.
So, let's get this straight: somehwo, you think that the middle classes paying 19-22% in effective federal taxes under an FT/NST is better than the 8%-18% they pay now?
So since you are for the FT basically you are arguing that it is better to "confiscate" MORE from the middle classes.
Look at the math, not the hyperbole.
Diskwin 3 years ago
the average rate at which the middle class is taxed on their income is about 15%,but that is just their income. you are leaving off property taxes, death taxes, everything you buy right now the price includes embedded taxes bring the price up, taxes on your savings, etc etc. putting us way over 20% federal taxes. under the fair tax our money/property is not confiscated, we decide when we are going to be paying taxes through our purchases. it is you that needs to look at the math.
bigdog1064 3 years ago
the average rate at which the middle class is taxed on their income is about 15%,but that is just their income. you are leaving off property taxes, death taxes, everything you buy right now the price includes embedded taxes bring the price up, taxes on your savings, etc etc. putting us way over 20% federal taxes. under the fair tax our money/property is not confiscated, we decide when we are going to be paying taxes through our purchases. it is you that needs to look at the math.
bigdog1064 3 years ago
the purchasing power of those that have saved and are retired will not be affected. prices will remain about the same. do you really favor this current (incomprehensible)tax system over the fair tax?
bigdog1064 3 years ago
Prices will not remain the same. Estate Taxes, capital gains taxes, and CIT do not directly effect prices.
Example: if Warren Buffett keeps all 50million$ of his income rather than paying in $10million in taxes (a rough estimate of his situation a few years ago), how much will the price of insurance go down?
If you answered $0.00, give yourself a prize.
I defintely favor the current system if the only choices are it or FT/NST, as raising the midclasses taxes with FT is a bad idea.
Diskwin 3 years ago
we have already covered this ground. lets see i can go with your belief that prices will increase or i can go with several economic professors/economists and business people who say that prices will remain about the same hmmmm i am going with the later. just curious does your lively hood depend on this insane tax code that nobody understands yourself included as you didnt even think of adding in all fed taxes paid in your last msg yeah keep thinking you are only paying 15% fed taxes
bigdog1064 3 years ago
what does warren buffet and his money have to do with the price of insurance?
bigdog1064 3 years ago
My point exactly-- he earns his income from Berkshire Hathaway fund (major insurance holdings).Again, if he didn't have to pay in that 10mill$ in taxes, and the FT/NST is REVENUE NEUTRAL, that $10mill has to be gotten from somewhere*. You are arguing that all federal taxes collected effect retail prices (are "embedded"), and this clearly shows that NOT ALL EFFECT THE RETAIL PRICE OF ITEMS... thus prices will very clearly go up after the tax of 23%i/30% is added on.
*by the middle classes
Diskwin 3 years ago
Name one "professors/economists" who says prices will stay the same or nearly the same, and point us to his numbers.
And I can't tell if you are dense or just playing the part on YouTube, but, as I have stated repeatedly, the 8-18% middle class figures from CBO include ALL INCOME TAXES, ALL FICA (employee AND employer), ALL CIT, and ALL EXCISE TAXES.
You really need to look at the numbers, since you clearly have not-- go to the CBO and fairtax org links and read.
Diskwin 3 years ago
if all persons/companies that sold insurance or anything for that matter then yes the price would go down. i am ending our debate it has been fun but we are now going in circles
bigdog1064 3 years ago
CIT along with all other taxes do affect prices, with those taxes removed the competitive market place will bring the prices down. and then there is also tax compliance costs. people infinitely more knowledgeable than myself say the same thing
bigdog1064 3 years ago
Now the guy that has saved his whole life to buy that RV or house for $100,000 the price after fair tax is going to be right about $100,000. so this guy takes his $100,000 out of his 401k at age 67 (take it any sooner and he will have to pay penalties) to buy his rv he has to pay taxes on that $100K now he is only left with about $77000 what a great deal!!! He is going to have to work a few more years to buy that RV or house. Under the fair tax he keeps every penny that he worked his but off for
bigdog1064 3 years ago
Through your vocabulary you have established yourself as childish and dense, I am sure that you have many other qualities that are as equally appealing. You also are obviously tethered to the end of the government leash. Taking all this into consideration I could care less about your little opinion, feel free to use any immature adjective you so desire to describe me I do not care. I will not waste one more syllable on you.
bigdog1064 3 years ago
. as would the price of everything else. but now add the fair tax and we are pretty close to the original price of that gallon of milk. this applies to just about everything that we now buy. but here is the kicker there were no federal taxes taken from your check
bigdog1064 3 years ago
This shows you are very confused about the math-- the taxes removed from paychecks are part of the supposed "embedded" taxes-- if everyeon gets their grosspay, prices will rise dramatically when you add the FT on, because the middle classes wil get 8-18% (their effective federal tax rate) more takehome, and the wealthiest 20% will get 26% more takehome, and both groups new effective rate will average around 19% (this is from supporters' own numbers-- see Beacon Hill papers).
Diskwin 3 years ago
just to get you started how about property taxes the farmer has to pay,employment taxes on his workers, every piece of equipment that farmer buys is taxed, all the money the farmer makes is taxed, same goes for the transportation of that milk as well as the distributors of that gallon of milk. if all taxes were removed would you not agree that the price of that gallon of milk would go down? ok so all the above taxes are removed the price of that gallon of milk goes down.
bigdog1064 3 years ago
Our country did not survive the first 100 years IT THRIVED!!!
every item than we now buy has embedded taxes. You mentioned a gallon of milk, by the time that gallon of milk get to the store where you can buy it how much do you think the cost of that milk is taxes (about 23%)?
bigdog1064 3 years ago
You mean when we had slaves do most of the work in the south?
Yeah -- slaves didn't pay any taxes.
Oh -- and here is a clue you idiot. The very RICH thrived -- about 1 on 1000. The rest squeeked by.
MakeMyPower 3 years ago
s the FT/NST "progressive" or "regressive"? Here is the quote from one of the Beacon Hill treatises on the AFT site:
"The key result of the foregoing discussion is that it matters fundamentally how one frames the discussion of the distributional effects of the FairTax. When people are sorted by expenditure per capita, the FairTax is progressive; when they are sorted by income per capita, it is regressive."
Those who undertand what this means now understand what a bad idea the FT/NST is.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
Oh yeah, its a voluntary tax!! Just buy USED stuff to avoid the tax!! Brilliant.
Only, how do you buy a used cancer operation? Used surgery? Used nursing home care?
How do you buy a used donut? A used Thanksgiving meal.
How do you get used rent? What about used toilet paper?
How do you get a used replacement knee? A used heart bypass?
Please tell me.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago
People that buy these items are already paying these taxes - they're hidden everywhere!
MattS70 3 years ago
Fairtax is a 35% tax on ALL cancer patients, ALL nursing home patients, ALL renters.
Its on all RENT, all Utilities, even all insurance premiums.
A person could easily get 50,000 in taxes, if he gets high medical cost, and only make 30,000. This is a nut job bogus plan.
GOD almighty I want to see you folks try to tax the parents of a child with leukemia 70,000 dollars. Explain how that's voluntary, and how the "prebate" will make it all work out.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago
Supporters will argue that folks can legally avoid the FT/NST-- but the problem is that, to be "revenue neutral," the rate will have to be raised if avoidance is too high, and this hammers the middle class.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
Ohh you liberals are all the same. You want to make sure the Govt keeps their fingers in everybody's wallet. That isn't freedom, its economic slavery.
albyva 4 years ago
albyva -- for your sake, I hope they pass it. Then you can tell us about it, when they tax your rent. When they tax your insurance payments. When they tax your medical cost. IF you ever get a serious disease, and your insurance pays 100K -- guess who gets to pay 30K in tax, bro? You dummy. You better learn this is a bogus nonsense piece of crapola. Its hogwash, its stupid, its magic pills for your gas tank.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago
I will never be in favor of giving Paris Hilton a tax cut while raising taxes on the average carpenter-- and that is exactly what the FT/NST would do.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
The "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-Inclusive aka "NaSTI"--
does not get new taxes from "pimps" but instead gives them free money ("prebate").
does not get rid of loopholes for the wealthy but gives them new easier loopholes.
does not accomplish wht taxes are meant to accomplish (gauging how much one has benefitted from society's use of said taxes).
IT is FAIL to the googolplex power.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
You stupid liberal, you forget that your income goes up under the fair tax. You take home 100% of your paycheck. So what if milk goes up $1.00, you are taking home more money. And you only pay taxes when you consume, not when you earn. Income Tax is like Slavery. Master gets his cut 1st, then you get yours.
albyva 4 years ago
Lol-- another person who fell for the "100% of your paycheck" disengenuous wording.
This has been explained repeatedly, the FIT and FICA are part of the embedded taxes-- if your employer doesn't cut your wages by these ampunts, prices will go up, making the amount you take home essentially have THE SAME purchasing power as the amount you take home now.
Income Tax(especially a FlatIT with base deduction) is a logical gauge of how one benefits from society's USE of taxes-- Spending is NOT.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
The Fairtax isn't about increasing a person's purchasing power. Its about shifting taxation from being Regressive to Progressive. No Taxes on Income or Investments. Capital Gains Taxes, Death Taxes, Inheritance Taxes, Savings-Income Tax, etc are all abolished. You are ONLY taxed when you purchase something. And only when that something is (NEW). If you by a NEW Car you pay the 23%. If you buy a Used Car you pay 0% in Federal Taxes. Why? Because the person who bought it new already paid the tax.
albyva 4 years ago
The "Fair" aka "NaSTI" tax is regressive across income-- FT site's own numbers show this, Beacon Hill admits it in one of their treatises, and any honest economist will tell you this.
By the numbers (SUITS, etc.) the "fair" tax is MORE REGRESSIVE than the current income tax-- and the income tax has been MADE more regressive mainly by CONSERVATIVE administrations over the last 27 years.
Huckabee wants to make taxes even MORE regressive (lowering the marginal rate).
I am for a Flat30 IT.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
And the more people avoid items that are taxed, the higher the rate will have to be to remain "revenue neutral"... and who can avoid it easily with large sums of money by, say, purchasing a "used" apt. building in Manhattan, or a castle in Germany? The extremely wealthy, who will thus end up paying MUCH less under an FT/NST.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
You can't avoid the tax when everything you consume is taxed. Case and point, the Sales Tax of most states. Try buying something without paying sales tax. A state wide sales tax is the exact same thing as a Fair Tax. After a home has been initially purchased, there is no more tax to pay, even if its resold 1000x times. Taxing Income is Regressive, Taxing Consumption is Progresive. And before 1913, we actually had no income tax, and America worked just fine.
albyva 4 years ago
Except "used" items and items purchased outside of the USA and not brought here are not taxed under the National Sales Tax, remember... so when the wealthy buy larger, "used" mansions and rental properties here and chateaus to live in in the Alps with their nontaxed income, who has to make up the difference to keep the tax "revenue neutral"-- who HAS to buy their food and electricity and water and medicine mostly within our borders? That's right, the middle classes.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
Simple solution, tax exports. Then it doesn't matter what they do outside the US, the tax was already paid. As for Used Mansions, so what. There are but so many Used Mansions to go around. Before long, Demand will exceed supply and new Mansions will need to be built. But the same for the Middle Class. They to will by used, until there are no used homes to meet demand. The rich still need utilities like the rest of us, so they'll pay their fair share.
albyva 4 years ago
"Tax exports" of what? Money? Buying a castle in Germany takes money, and it takes non-taxed money out of the US economy under the FT/NST. And no new mansion will need to be built, they can just buy extra, "vacation" mansions in other parts of the world.
The point is, if the very wealthy lower how much tax they pay under the FT/NST just a small percentage, say 10%, it is a large amount, and has to be made up for somehow-- and that somewhow? Raising the rate, which hammers the middle classes.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
The Middle Class or any Class doesn't get hammered until they purchase something. That is the beauty of the Fair Tax. You Pay when you Consume, Not when you earn. Taxing earning is a form of slavery. Most people work from Jan-April for the Government to pay their taxes. Then in May they actually start earning money for themselves. And if a Fairtax leads to fewer Govt dollars, then SO BE IT. The Govt will just have to adjust its Spending Downward.
albyva 4 years ago
The middle class HAS to eat. The more the tax is avoided by everyone, the higher the rate has to be, and the more the middle class is hammered.
The supporters' economists, to try and twist the numbers to favor the FT, look at it over time and assume that people at the top spend MORE than their annual income on taxed items, in effect spending savings on taxed items. Not bloody likely.
Plus they count on the babyboomers spending all their savings pre-death (mainly on medical expenses).
Diskatopia 4 years ago
From what I can see there would be a big rush on higher priced items (new cars, big TV's and so on) just before this national sales tax would go into effect. Then there would be a long stretch where new items would not be selling under the fair tax. How could this be good for the ecconomy? Plus for a while the new items will still have the current embeded taxes in there cost plus the national sales tax.
thomasm2112 4 years ago
Its an initial pain for long term gain. So if we all get screwed in the beginning, so what. It'll all benefit everybody in the end and hundreds of years from now. Earn every nickel you deserve. Only pay taxes when you consume. And thats consume something "new".
albyva 4 years ago
The "Fair" Tax aka National Sales Tax-Inclusive aka "NaSTI"--
does not get new taxes from "pimps" but instead gives them free money ("prebate").
does not get rid of loopholes for the wealthy but gives them new easier loopholes.
does not accomplish wht taxes are meant to accomplish (gauging how much one has benefitted from society's use of said taxes).
IT is FAIL to the googolplex power.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
I wish FT would work as advertised. But The math is absurd. It cant even be passed as planned - nursing homes would demand and get exemptions. Cancer patients would demand and get exemptions. Miltary, new home sales, renters, there would be a parade of lobbyist CORRECTLY demanding exemptions. The 23 would be 40-50%, and you would have huge compliance problems. It just wont work.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago
Huckabee's tax plan?
Vote Ron Paul!
It's a Revolution!
greyhoundfriend123 4 years ago
Huckabee disengenuousness today, January 13--
Huckabee- (Paraphrasing)"I would lower marginal tax rates"...
Translation: I will give the wealthy another big tax cut.
Very sly wordplay on his part. Just like much of the "research" (lol) at fairtaxdotorg
Diskatopia 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Thompson is raking in donations. Please add YOURS to it, today! FRED08(dot)com
Huckabee is dangerous and would destroy the Republican party as we've known it to be....he's been weighed, tested and found wanting!
egginanest 4 years ago
Read the damn book. And get the new one out soon. "Answering the Critics" This is being published to answer all your questions.
jimisback 4 years ago
People have only said this 1000 times ...
The book and the actual bill are not the same plan.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
Please explain the diff. Thanks.
jimisback 4 years ago
jim, I will get the book asap, but it cant possibly answer some. For example, since nursing home patients will have to be taxed 14,000 a year or more, on their care, how will FT help them, since they dont get a paycheck. And the "savings" to the nursing home would be about a 3,000.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago
You researched this plan? Really, how? What is your research about renters when suddenly they pay 23% sales tax on rent. When nursing homes charge 23% more, when cancer patients pay 23% more for care? What research did you do on a 23% tax on new homes? Why would anyone buy a 300K new home,with a 23% sales tax? They would buy a used home, and the new housing market goes belly up. You folks didnt research ship.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago
Fans of the "Fair" Tax (or as I call it, the "NaSTy" Tax-- National Sales Tax) should read
taxprofdottypepaddotcom/taxprof_blog/files/bartlett_fair_taxdotpdf
Diskatopia 4 years ago
What's even funnier are the people who claim the following
1) "You can take home your whole paycheck!"
and yet, they claim
2)"Retail prices will drop 23% because the embedded taxes will be gone"
Here's a hint-- if you take home your whole paycheck, those embedded TAXES may be "gone" but the embedded COST is still there for the company. So removing FIT doesn't do much to lower the cost of goods if the employer still has to outlay the same $ as they would with FIT.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
There's a "chance" retail prices could drop.
We're getting people with a lot of "I know business" claims and "I know this will work" absolutes in the face of a "chance".
But see - these same promises & absolutes were there when free trade was initiated.
The "chance" that (if our retailers could exploit the cheap labor of other countries) our prices lower dramatically.
Retailers didn't lower their prices, BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE TOO.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
Joegod -- yes,good point. But the embeded cost will still be there. THis is lunacy. Taxes will still be paid -- actually MORE taxes --but anyway, taxes will still be paid by everyone along the line. THere will still be the cost of taxes passes along, just like before, only, sales tax, not income tax.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago
Piecemeal, the FairTax doesn't work. There are 4 pieces:
1- The sales tax is 23%, using the same basis as our income tax.
2- Income and corp. taxes are gone.
3- Taxes hidden in prices, 22%, gone. Add the FairTax and prices are unchanged.
4- Every citizen gets a Prebate, nullifying the FairTax on necessities.
Put together, prices are unchanged. Plus you get to keep all that you've earned! You are taxed only when you spend. Sounded too-good-to-be-true so I bought The Fair Tax Book.
IveReallyAnAwfulItch 4 years ago
NO -- the high national sales tax would ALSO have constitutional amendment to stop income tax. This high national sales tax is idiotic -- insane - cause it would be 30-40% on cars, houses, medical cost, dental visits. We would have a catastrophic drop is sales -- try to grasp this.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago
A high national sales tax would be absurd -- it would be on houses- cars -- food -- medical operations. It would destroy the real estate industry and the auto industry -- in a month. Its crazy. It doesnt even slow down at stupid. A high national sales tax is so so so stupid - lets do it, to show the morons how dumb it is.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago
Those agreeing with this idea are blindly ignorant.
People actually expect us to not only have the funds for Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare but to pay out "monthly reimbursements" to every tax payer.
Ridiculous.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
Ron Paul wants to replace the income tax with...... NOTHING! His plan is to reduce government spending to that of just a decade ago, then we could eliminate the IRS and replace them with nothing!! FUCK YOU IRS!
mattburnz123 4 years ago
It's the best idea ... get rid of income tax, the Federal Reserve and force Congress to stay on budget.
If you replace one tax with another tax it still doesn't prevent Congress from over spending and borrowing from the banks.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
This loser don't even pay federal tax I'm sure because he probably don't work and hasn't worked in years. "Get a haircut and get a real job"
johngreendeere 4 years ago
You confuse me... most of your concerns have nothing to do with the fairtax idea, such as razing taxis on individual products.. in the fiartax concept all new products are taxed at the same 23%
mjcrawford23 4 years ago 2
It's something the supporters of this need to know; There is the Fair Tax Book and there is the Fair Tax Bill. I'm talking about the bill, which is far different from what Neal Boortz & John Linder wrote.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
the fairtax is REVENUE nuetral, not EXPENDITURE neutral. the amount ppl pay is dramatically reduced while the gov rev is the same. this is the only way congress would ever pass tax reform. the fairtax eliminates the hidden embedded taxes thus making gov more efficient. you should educate yourself. read.
catfrenzy 4 years ago
revenue neutral - are you nuts? When you tax a car or house 40% -- you are going to get a lot less sales. Helloo ----- figure it out. Sales would go to as low as possible, ruining the economy. This is the dumbest idea I have ever heard. WE need to enact it, just so people can find out how dumb it is.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago
"every new movement or manifestation of human activity, when unfamilliar in peoples minds, is sure to be misunderstood and misinterpreted" - edward carpenter
educate yourself!
catfrenzy 4 years ago 2
Obviously you have not read the book. You should read it then post a retraction.
samspyder11 4 years ago
Obviously you don't know the Fair Tax book and the actual HR 25 Bill do not match in facts. Everything I said had to do with the bill they tried to pass in Congress.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
They havent voted on the bill yet. Its still in commitee.
samspyder11 4 years ago
It's been passed through twice since this video.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
The Federal Reserve Bank and the IRS were established the very same year.
frankenguitars 4 years ago
hawaiistories(dot) com/george/2007/08/17/the-words-that-make-you-free/
An income tax or any substitute is not needed period. It is an illusion that this tax pays for goods and services provided by the government. The Fair Tax people seem to be well intentioned, but lack a fundamental understanding of how the government is actually funded. Read 'The creature from Jekyll Island'.
tofubadguy 4 years ago
I totally agree my friend. The "fair" tax is a open door to tyranny. Its anything but fair
thorsmitersaw 4 years ago
How? It eliminates government's ability to hide tax hikes, it brings everything out in the open and makes our "representatives" liable for their actions and decisions. The bottom earners in this country would have their tax burdens eliminated by the prebate. ANYONE earning up to $26,500 per year would effectively pay no taxes.
0takop 4 years ago 2
0takop - You need to stay away from the Fair Tax Book and read the actual bill.
How in the hell can anyone still trust these goddamn politicians ?
j0eg0d 4 years ago
I HAVE read the bill. Perhaps YOU should turn off Air America and do the same.
0takop 3 years ago
No you haven't, and I can't stand Air America.
j0eg0d 3 years ago
Wow! Have you been stalking me to know what I have and have not been doing? If so, perhaps I should file for an arrest warrant and restraining order against you. Or you can admit you have no clue what I have or not been doing and that you lied about me (committed slander) to make a point. Either way, it cheapens your argument if you need to lie to reinforce it.
0takop 3 years ago
Slander would be me spreading rumors about the habitual masturbation between you and your retarded cousin.
See, that would be a cheap argument. Big difference.
You comparing the Fair Tax Bill & the Fair Tax Book, yet not understanding the inconsistencies would mean you either lied or you're just an idiot.
I gave you the benefit of the doubt ... my apologies.
j0eg0d 3 years ago
LMFAO BUUURN CRACKED ME UP
DangerousCult 3 years ago
You can't have a fair tax without a huge reduction in spending.
dagnome1984 4 years ago
You are factually incorrect about the FairTax impact on price structure.
You neglect to mention the FairTax impact on wage rates.
Your milk example is wrong.
Nothing stops congress now from having both taxes...but we don't.
Nothing stops congress now from picking and choosing winning and losing participants in the tax code. In fact, that is a current problem that would be more easily fixed under the FairTax.
cphine 4 years ago
Right... and we can only trust Ron Paul to bring the size of govenment to a level that allows for a sustainable reduction in its income. He will also work to remove the "inflation tax" and curtail spending like no other.
PoliticalAdvisor 4 years ago
Ron Paul has a legitimate plan, but the fairtax is a scam.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
Because people are fucking stupid. ;)
icmp 4 years ago
They should not TAX necessities like food, clothing, prescription medications AND THEN expect us to simply not purchase those necessities when money gets tight.
They should ALSO NOT tax the retirement benefits of Seniors that have spent their life paying taxes for Social Security, just to get that income and have it taxed AGAIN.
That isn't FAIR ! Why are people for that ?
j0eg0d 4 years ago
First, the FairTax rebate reimburses one for taxes on necessities. It's better to do it this way because it only allows the rich to be exempted on necessities up to the poverty level instead of all food, clothing, etc. Second, the FairTax does NOT tax retirement benefits as they are taxed now.
ytdalesmith 4 years ago
A) the Fair Tax plain is to REPEAL the 16th Amendment which would take away the governments ability to tax income.
B) you'll still be able to afford your milk. With the elimination of the income tax you will have a lot more money. If you are in lower class economically, making $30,000 or less a year you will not be tax on "necessary goods" such as groceries.
Not to mention Corporation taxes will not exist, thus the price of milk will naturally lower.
bridgeproductions 4 years ago
You seriously need to read up on that.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
The FairTax's flat consumption tax and pre-bate would be enacted before the 16th Amendment could be repealed.
growson 4 years ago
No it won't.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
The reason for $3,85 milk is the 20 to 30% of hidden taxes that corporations pass on in the price of their products, after the fairtax you will pay about the same for milk and pay it with 100% of your pay instead of the after tax paycheck you have now.
FairTaxman 4 years ago
I'm stunned by the number of people that think businesses would actually lower their prices.
If corporations aren't forced to lower their prices; Why would they ?
Look at the way it works. Businesses aren't in competition anymore, they work together to keep prices high ... just like the Oil Industry does.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
I agree to some point, especially on Big oil, but in a free market society, especially retail, competition will force prices down to their lowest common denominator. I am a small business owner and I added up that I spend $8000 per year of time and money on taxes out of the $100,000 in annual sales. That is not including the hidden taxes in the products I buy to resell.
FairTaxman 4 years ago
If only we were truely living in a "free market". America is a managed economy, so the claim that prices will lower isn't a guarantee. I go with the evidence at hand, so I can't agree with their theory.
Look at products & services which are already set by the government; we're paying more than the rest of the world for several products.
Should we trust lobbyists & special interest groups to push our Federal & State Governments to lower the prices of their goods ?
j0eg0d 4 years ago
Yes, we should. Why can you get a PC for $499 when a computer that was infinitely slower in 1990 cost $12,000?
growson 4 years ago
Because the cost came from the "build price". How do people not know this stuff ? As computer companies made improvements on their build costs, they were able to lower prices for the consumer market. Before hand they only sold to corporations and government agencies. They have to set a margin of affordability before it's made public. Now that they're selling PC at $499; What REASON would they need to lower it further ? None.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
j0eg0d: I think that you are into conspiracy gremlins too much. Yes, we need to be watchful for cartels, but most corporations are indeed competitive. Driven by the free market, they are forced to bring down prices when their costs goes down.
IveReallyAnAwfulItch 4 years ago
Removing FIT, coprorate tax, inheritance tax, and SStaxes costs will not reduce RETAIL prices by anywhere near 23%, especially on goods manufactured in China.
With a "Fair" tax, prices would go up significantly.
Ask someone who has owned a retail store to explain this to you if you don't see why this is true.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
Diskatopia: You are correct in principle in so far that the pricing of imported goods will respond to a different model. Understanding this model is beyond my skill, but I suspect that only the embedded wholesaler/retailer taxes will be eliminated. However, the prices are still subject to local competition. The net effect will probably raise prices on imported goods, making US produced goods more attractive.
IveReallyAnAwfulItch 4 years ago
No, that is not true.. again FIT/CIT and SS/FICA are very small parts of US retail prices, and those are the only taxes removed under the "Fair" tax bill. COL wages in China, India, Mexico, Indonesia, etc., are so much lower than in the USA that removing those taxes here will hardly change US production costs enough to make us labor-competitive.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
See, here's the rub-- even assuming that somehow, even with the new costs of about 450billion as "prebate," those "embedded tax cost" cuts keep prices the same when the inclusive NST is added, that means people have to get the same paycheck they do now-- otherwise those embedded costs are still there for the employer, and prices go up.
Diskatopia 4 years ago
Sorry, youtube wouldn't let me put this in the first comment, so:
Now, they are probably correct in saying that rather than a 30% sales tax it'd be more like 20% but again that is still a ridiculous amount.
icmp 4 years ago
Dude. SPOT ON. No "Tax" is ever fair so the nomenclature itself ought to raise our suspicions..
BTW, I defended your comment on Huckabees original video against two other people after they asked you "the difference" since the "$3.85" for milk is "already taxed" .. and they are correct-- THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE. What a fucking scam.
Keep supporting ron paul. What a revolutionary idea to replace the IRS with NOTHING! :)
icmp 4 years ago
Thank you. I get criticisms from the most gullible people in the world and it can get frustrating ^_^
j0eg0d 4 years ago
yeah, in canada we start making money in middle of june. oooo thats soon.
pornfartin 4 years ago
I disagree with some of your points, but I think you made a very good video. I disagree but am more open to your ideas then I might have been before you made this. Good vid.
Gimmeabreakman 4 years ago
Thanks, Victor - Feel free to post your disagreements, I don't mind.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
Get a haircut. LOL!
Gimmeabreakman 4 years ago
D'OH !!!
j0eg0d 4 years ago
Hi Joseph,
Interesting comments. Some points. If congress wants to bring back the income tax in addition to the Fair Tax, it will have to bring back the IRS and April 15. Prices will not go up 30% because we un-tax corporate income and employer payroll, and we remove compliance costs. 11-17% is more realistic. Working people will have 30% more take-home pay, so their purchasing power will be greater. If Congress wants to increase taxes, everybody will see it. That's healthy! ~Jim
jbennettatty 4 years ago
In point the Internal Revenue Service won't acually be going anywhere - it'll simply be under a different agency, and we will still need to keep receipts in case of their audits. It's stated in the 'HR 25 Bill'.
Also, I wouldn't trust the majority of corporations to lower their prices. It's business thinking to make high-profit. Such industries will imagine Americans having more cash savings and I'd say they'd raise prices to capitalize on that.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
Under the bill the IRS, with 100,000 employees, will be replaced with a Sales Tax Bureau and an Excise Tax Bureau under Treasury, 5,000 employees. The states, in most cases, will collect the tax.
True, free-market theory is that people act in their own self-interest. However in Dec 1995 Congress forgot to renew an airline ticket tax. After one month prices dropped to their 1995 level w/o tax. When Congress remembered what it had forgotten, prices returned to their 1995 level w. tax. ~Jim
jbennettatty 4 years ago
You're getting that from websites and NOT the Fair Tax Act proposal.
READ HR 25 Section 101(d):
(1)The person using or consuming taxable property or services in the United States is liable for the tax imposed by this section, except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection.
j0eg0d 4 years ago
(2) EXCEPTION WHERE TAX PAID TO SELLER - A person using or consuming a taxable property or service in the United States is not liable for the tax imposed by this section if the person pays the tax to a person selling the taxable property or service and receives from such person a purchaser's receipt within the meaning of section 510.
In other words, you, not the seller, are liable for the sales tax. Meaning we better keep our receipts in case of audit.
j0eg0d 4 years ago