lol, i see what the guy above was talkin about, you are ignorant..i was purely stating an example, i never said the future of the tax system should rely solely on my fathers spending habits.
No it is you who is ignorant my friend. I know you did not, but you used it as an argument in this thread. Learn to debate and come back would you?
just ignore him, most of us do...he has to have the last word, he can't except when he is wrong, and he is ignorant to really find out all the information. If you ask Gtech, GRIM is also a flip-flopper.
you read? how about reading this: get the facts straight from the horses mouth (which you often cannot do. http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=calculator
yeah i don't understand why he has ron paul as his avatar but he hates the fair tax? i was a bit confused with that
ahh you and Gtech is 'most' is it? Problem with that, you have NEVER proved me wrong, maybe in this thread with your fair tax you can Really? Wow since I've already proven you wrong on the fair tax that you support so much and know so much about I find this funny. Really now? Gtech I don't believe never even accused me of a flip flopper. Maybe once upon a time, I guess it's possible.... Glad to see you bringing up the guy you hope to be like. The guy who really describes your baseless attacks above The 'last word' argument is a pathetic attempt to win a debate when you have lost I see you like to play that card as much as your homeboy Gtech.
Ron Paul does not support the fair tax Nor does anyone support every item their candidate stands for in most all instances.
RP is actually not a fairtax supporter, although Huckabee is...like I said, do yourself a favor and just let GRIM talk to himself. Its a much more pleasant (and factual) conversation that way.
Ahh you 'might' have me for once here, I hope you do to be honest. As I have not looked much into it to be truthful, every time I have I almost puke. Where does it state on that site ALL state and local sales taxes will be destroyed? 'talk about a disaster waiting to happen' What you linked to does not show this from what I witnessed Come on D16 this is your chance. A subject you have read up on, come on prove me wrong. I am hoping like hell for you. You talk so much shit it would be great for you for once to do it. Hell I'll even give you a big old green!
D16 you are being so dishonest here if you actually think you are more intelligent on these P&R forums than me.. I mean seriously come on now, what fantasy world are you in?
i was watching a video today on you tube...it was an interview with one of the candidates and the this dude from the IRS...i could of swore it was ron paul....i'm lookin for the vid now
BTW straight from 'the horses mouth' All the taxes 'abolished' Where is state and local taxes? hmmmmm http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers#2 Can someone please give me an OWNED I actually feel sorry for him, and to think a subject he is so passionate about
Did D16 say that the Fair Tax would remove State Tax? Is he sure about this? You didn't answer my question though. 23% is the proposed opening rate, not a permanent rate. If it is a fixed upper rate, then please post that. But if it can go higher, that is important for people to know.
As I look back at my post...I should have finished my thought...the state sales tax as we know it is gone, along with the 16th amendment. For more information about this, please go to this link: http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/TheFairTaxWhatsInItForTheStates.pdf This is a wonderful explanation (to long to post) of how the States that collect sales tax (it is only 45 if I remember correctly), will have to redo their tax code...those that don't have sales tax are in another boat. In terms of the fixed upper rate...we have to be careful, because a lot of people say that the fairtax is a flat tax, which is untrue. from the FT website:
I've just read through this - great discussion. From what I can tell, the thing is flatly wrong (ridiculous pun, I know, but...), for many reasons. It also seems (from reliance on the Fairtax website itself, as Grim and others have done, at the recommendation of D16), that the thing is dead in the water. D16 is simply wrong, I'd have to say. I'd also say good job, especially Grim, for fleshing this interesting discussion out. A few other salient points, seems to me. -a flat tax on necessities consumption (good point, Grim) neglects that there is no such thing as "the" economy. The economy is composed of almost infinitely variegated goods and services. Folks with little left over after necessities will be left with a bigger bite of pain. As I used to say, in business, when evaluating COGS, too many people go with standard business-school books and forget you don't take percentages, but money, to the bank. If you have $5 to your name, and what you need to live on costs $4, your $1 hurts a helluva lot more than if you have $5M, you spend to your heart's content, on both goods and necessities, and have your $2.3 million left in the bank. It isn't fair. -no business will receive an increase in taxes owed, without raising prices accordingly, absent being forced to do so. (Another good point, Grim). And D16's post in response here, too, is fallacious. The additional $25 paid isn't "nothing," air, just a transfer between the consumer and the government with the merchant acting as an unaffected "broker." A consumer paying $100 to a merchant bought goods that had a percentage of COGS associated with them. Obviously, a consumer buying more "stuff" means more COGS to the merchant went into the purchase. So it isn't simply a "transfer." The merchant has to eat more COGS, but gets none of the benefit. Wrong. -the thing just discourages spending. Can we say, excess capacity, folks? Increasing the inducement to a demand standstill isn't bright.