Which candidate can do the best for the US economy?

grasping at straws??? lmfao!!! The only one grasping at straws are the followers of RP who still think he has (or ever) had a chance...

This explains why you are against it...real conservatives want a smaller govt...not a bigger one. Getting rid of the IRS is a positive step toward deleting hundreds of (IMO) useless jobs anyway. Furthermore, cut out the annual spending to audit people and you save even more. Add in the fact that EVERYONE (INCLUDING ILLEGALS, THOSE EVIL RICH, ETC.) will be paying the same tax on the money they spend, means more money in the treasury. Add in the rebate checks to those that are not in the same economic status as those EVIL RICH and you have a more fair economy for those that are either too lazy to work or are not as fortunate. Furthermore, those illegals that are now going to be actually paying tax will see $0 rebate check...yet we get more of that money back.

But hey, since RP was against it, you are. Just shows your ignorance to even figure out what the Fairtax really is.

 

I propose the "No-Tax" law. Now send me your monies.

 

No, please. Don't make me, O-W-N you again. Must resist rwnage.

And replacing them with the FairTax bureaucracy. Paul wants to eliminate the IRS and replace it with nothing.

You will have to audit businesses to make sure they are in compliance. ..

Small government conservatives (read: real conservatives, not neocons like yourself) don't want more money in the treasury. They want it in the hands of the consumer, being used in consumption or savings (accumulation of capital). The idea is for the government to get very little, and nothing more. Not to turn the government into a profitable business, like Huckababy did in Arkansas. The guy is so proud the state had a surplus. Which means the state took and kept more money than it needed, money that belonged to the citizens.

Who are these evil rich? I can't tell if you are being obtuse or sarcastic. You've not displayed a talent for being clever, so I'm leaning towards obtuse.

Is evil rich a dig at socialists? I'm not a socialist. I'm a capitalist pig. Interesting that you claim to be a Christian, and lump the lazy and unfortunate into the same category. Lemme guess, you grew up poor and this is some manifestation of self loathing?

The rebate checks are fraud bait. You will see an underground economy where people work for cash or barter (because it is not taxed) and then they will claim their rebate check on top of it.

More of what money back? If they pay taxes, they will have a claim on entitlements. The idea is to get the immigrants off of entitlements, not to grow the entitlement program. Jesus, Mary and Joseph. Do you understand fiscal conservatism at all?

What's ignorant is your blind following of the radio celeb Neal Boortz, a wannabe economist who comes up with this wacky system that doesn't even guarantee that the 16th will be removed from the Constitution, doesn't set a limit on spending, and doesn't guarantee that the income tax will not return on top of the Fair Tax.

Ron Paul doesn't even oppose the Fair Tax. He just doesn't endorse it. That's because he understands the intent of the Founders, and a federal tax of this magnitude was not one of the plans when they wrote the Constitution. Tax on it's own is immoral, and until you understand that, you will never be able to find principle for your arguments on taxation.

 

He may not have the capability to understand it. That would explain why he's focused on attacking you over it, rather than discussing it.

 

No Tax is better than any tax.

I showed in another topic how many costs could be cut and shifted from the federal government to eliminate the personal income tax, and keep social security at its current level, while also having a 200-300 billion dollar surplus. But of course, few people choose to listen because they're to busy waving their collective wankers in the air and comparing sizes.

 

Ahh so yet again you think you know more about someone than they themselves do.

BTW just to prove you wrong yet again, I was for a flat/fair based tax system. I even wrote to my congressman Sensenbrener urging him to support such a system, this was during the time of Clinton. His office sent be a response explaining why he did not support such a system. I read the letter, agreed with much of it and have been against similar tax ideas mainly because of this.

I guess since you know all, I must have known Huckabee would be running for president and that he would support a fair tax back then hey?

Not to mention the items I brought up previously, many of which d16 was proven wrong on, you know those pesky things I do not like about the fairtax system, but Gtech says it's all because of Huck so it must be.

Talk about narcissist.

Yet again where did you get your degree in mental health? If anyone is a narcissist that would be you

Nope Gtech, yet again I have stated over and over why I do not see them as being racist. I do not see them being racist, that is not denial, nor is it because I was 'ashamed to not support RP' Nice lack luster try yet again.

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=5284688&postcount=85'
Wow Gtech linking to a post which shows my position helps you in your argument how exactly? If anything it shows yet again you are the loser you appear to be.

I'll proudly quote what you linked to..

I state I could care less if he wrote them or not as I DO NOT find them racist, how that's so hard for you to understand is simply amazing.

Ahh yet you know what EVERYONE is talking about, why they stand for everything, even more so than the person themselves.

So you admit you are talking out of your ass here? You are claiming to know the subject at hand, but will not reread the thread. Gtech in all honesty a joke is all you are.

Gtech, wow rehash the same things over and over and over. We went these rounds, I plainly explained why I did not see them as being racist. How you twisted this subject into RP yet again is simply ridiculous. Huckabee had NOTHING to do with me not supporting the fairtax. Jesus Christ do you simply feed off of being the biggest lying prick you can be?

Yeah Gtech when a guy like you spouts crap and lies it pisses some people off If you'd ever actually post with intellect and honesty maybe we could have a decent discussion, I wont hold my breath though.

So how about discussing the actual topic, oh yeah you wont even read the thread in question, you'd rather distort as usual.

Excuse me while I go talk to some grass..

 

I wonder why some 'resort' to methods. When others fire the opening shot I will respond in kind..

 

I believe that's the best prescription you can make for yourself. Grass doesn't talk back. I'm quite confident that you can "own" some grass. But if the grass gets you backed into a corner, you can always stomp on it to shut it up!

The rest of the delusion wasn't worth responding to. You are the only person I know that can post something on a forum, then when called on it, go back and say you didn't post it, despite it being quoted. That takes a special kind of person.

 

Grass is far more intelligent than the likes of you

Ahh the rest of the reality hey?
What exactly did I not post?

The special kind of person you are is the type who takes 4 words out of a 20 word post and pastes it together in such a way to give it meaning it does not originally have.

So I take it you refuse to look at the thread in question. Figures.

 

LMAO! That was a reply to guerilla's post. No name was mentioned and especially not yours. Perhaps you just thought the shoe fit?

I'll give ya a pass on that one. It's too easy. I prefer to earn it

Next?

 

Nope nothing to do with 'who's' post, you did
#1 include my name in your post.
#2 call me it all the time.

---but it's ok for you to always call names, not anyone else I almost forgot that---


But since it's your trump card you play against everyone who does not agree with you it shows just how little it actually means

So what is too easy? Obviously not debating, as you as usual go against what is actually being discussed and bring up such things as 'RP being racist' and then twisting what was said and what was meant. Which that had what to do with this thread?

How about getting back on topic? Oh no we could not have that, perhaps because you have absolutely nothing to add?

Next, or should I say next lie and twist?

 

I find it remarkably humorous that you would actually know that. Do you talk to your grass often? What if the grass talks back? Do you beat it, yell at it, take the lawnmower to it? Maybe cut off it's water supply for a few days until it gives in and agrees that you are always right?

Next time you're out there having a meaningful conversation with your grass, ask it if it's ever seen a Sasquatch or a UFO. k?

 

Grass does not lie, distort, and act like a general jack ass.

In other words it's nothing like you

 

So you agree that I didn't call you a narcissist? I'm glad we have that settled, since clearly I was responding to guerilla and no names were mentioned.

I didn't call you a name. I went out of my way not to mention your narcissism problem. I know you are sensitive about it.

Projectionism.

It's not possible to debate with you. It's your way or the highway. Clearly you came in and started pumping yourself up about "owning" others, as usual. Now you are trying to suggest you just wanted to debate

More projectionism. I'm flattered you hold me to a higher standard than yourself. Lead by example, big boy

Yes, you may offer another lie or twist. Let me know which one you prefer. I have some spare time to give you some attention.

Keep trying, Grim. Maybe you should go out and ask your grass for some tips?

 

A bonus! Grass that is different from you, doesn't talk back, and you can beat it if it disagrees! I bet you "own" that grass real good!

Do you prefer Bermuda or Fescue? Probably Fescue, eh?

 

I don't think any of the candidates will be particularly good for the economy. John McCain has admitted that economics is not his strong area and the dems will just go for more regulation and throwing government monies at the problem plus the dems abhor the supply side too much to be good for the economy without a republican congress. I'm just hopeful that whoever is president isn't bad for the economy.
I agree with whoever said Ron Paul understand economics the most out of the whole bunch but he's obviously no longer a choice.

 

But if it's 30% tax at least I decide how to spent it. It get gives freedom to the people. Taking money out of your check every time gives you no right on how to spend your own money. If you would like to know how much money you could have without taxes check this report if people would read this report I think we should all think about an alternative. Just my thought.

 

While the choice itself is an inherently good thing, the government still contributes to what choices people make when they set the economic rules. If they only tax new goods, people will buy more used goods. If they tax services, people will opt for fewer services (even more DIY incentive)...

As a result of the choices people would inevitably be encouraged to make, consumption would decline and the tax rate of a consumption tax would need to be increased. But the higher tax rate would just yield more disincentive to consumption!

Overall, there would probably be a marginal benefit for a flat tax or consumption tax, but would it be greater than the marginal cost of transitioning the system? I'm not as sure as 2 million tax professionals would be dislocated or need to be re-educated for a new structure.

Any fix to the fundamental economic problems in America have to be addressed through reductions in government spending. How the government collects the money it wastes is less important than the fact its wasting it.

 

Now that is the truth. People can argue all day about taxes, but if we don't deal with the government overspending we are all going to be in a world of hurt.

 

The "Fair Tax" doesn't get rid of the IRS. It does change the IRS's mission.