all very true!
Flat Percentage Tax Rate
Flat Dollar Tax
all very true!
Really, what's it matter to a poor person if he gets robbed? He didn't loose much. But if a rich man gets robbed, he can loose millions. So wouldn't you agree that the rich man benefits more from our police and military and fire protection than the poor guy?
actually sales taxes at the retail level are easier to enforce and more difficult to cheat on than income taxes. for me to attempt to cheat on my income tax, all it requres is that i lie as i fill out a form, in front of no one. for me to attempt to cheat on a retail sales tax, i have to convince Wal-Mart to become my co-conspirator, when they have nothing to gain and much to lose.It has it's own bureaucracy figuring and giving out prebates. And of course since everyone in the country now has the greatest incentive in history to become scofflaws (and everyone a tax collector), there would be a huge enforcement staff needed to stop the BLACK/cash economy that would result
in addition, the move from an income to a retail sales tax significantly reduces the number of collection points by about 80% (from 145 million to about 25 million), as each individual is no longer filing a return.
so, to cap; you claim that far fewer filers, operating under conditions that reduce the incentives for cheating and make it more difficult to do so would be a population that is harder to enforce?
firstly, that scoring depends on changing the law to exclude some goods and services at the retail level. so yeah. if you turn the FairTax into something other than the FairTax; then the result will be different.And Independent scoring of Fairytax's even claimed 30% rate is more in the mid 50's% range
secondly this article you cited? is a friggin joke. the title alone Does adding 30% to the price of every house sold sound like a good idea to you?, is laughable. when you reduce one kind of taxation and add another, you can't pretend the subtraction didn't happen. furthermore, the tax would only apply to houses sold at the RETAIL level; only new houses, not every one. then there is this gem:actually the FairTax rate does account for the cost of the rebate, it's not based on income (but by the number of members in the household), and the US government already tries (and generally fails) to track every households' income. this guy is either a particularly bad liar, or a friggin moron.sending monthly checks to every household based on income. Aside from the incredible complexity and intrusiveness of tracking every American's monthly income--and creating a de facto national welfare program--the FairTax does not include the cost of this rebate in the tax rate.
i'd like to see your figure on how the upper 1% would see their taxes cut by 90%; but you are correct. the FairTax does expand the tax base. now included are our large illegal immigrant population (who buy things at wal-mart), drug dealers and other members of the underground economy (who do the same), and millions of annual visitors to our shores. also included are all those corporations who famously spend billions of dollars avoiding their corporate tax burden; but who still need to purchase office supplies and buildings.Another Basic problem being being you just can't reduce the upper 1%'s taxes by 90% without making someone else pay.
in fact it is more progressive than our current system.It's grotesquely regressive.
in fact by allowing all Americans to live tax-free up to the poverty line, it does.To cloak this obvious scam they give a prebate which is supposed to take care of the lower incomes, but of course it doesn't.
Last edited by cpwill; 07-12-10 at 06:40 PM.
- Alexander Hamilton. Spiritual father of #NeverTrump
I think perhaps a (mwahahah) fairly "fair" tax (for arbitrary definitions of "fair") would be one that taxed the overall net worth of someone.
As an example, a 10% tax on the net worth of a person per year.
That would seem to tax the very rich quite a bit more than the very poor, even if it were only 10% of their very rich...richness.
But then again, this is just a half-formed idea that occurred to me.
And besides, calculating the individual net worth of everyone in the US...
Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller
What you are suggesting would only be logical if all poor people made exactly the maximum income to be considered impoverished.