• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Fair Tax

Do you support the Fair Tax?


  • Total voters
    45
Again. Show me how this is non-partisan legislation. The only people I see supporting this in congress are 55 Republicans 1 Democrat. That leads me to believe that the people behind this are OVERWHELMINGLY Republican and Conservative in nature. Not 'non-partisans' as you misleadingly claim. Or are you going to pretend that Republicans aren't overwhelmingly supportive of a "Fair Tax" while Democrats oppose it? This is a one party issue. Republicans clearly support it. Democrats don't. Don't go calling it non-partisan and misleading us into believing it's not an idea that is supported by one ideology and opposed by another.
I think the point is it is not one party's ideology, it originates outside the party and has support far beyond that party and does not actively campaign for one party.
 
Last edited:
I think the point is it is not one party's ideology, it originates outside the party and has support far beyond that party and does not actively campaign for one party.

The claim : The FairTax Act (HR 25, S 296) is nonpartisan legislation.

The evidence :

Americans For Fair Taxation: Co-Sponsor Gallery

Supported overwhelmingly/brought by/drafted by Republicans.

In Congress :

Americans For Fair Taxation:

Opposed by both Republicans & Democrats.

The only thing 'non-partisan' about this is the universal opposition to it. The legislation itself is clearly right winged. Please stop playing semantics and call a duck a duck?
 
The claim : The FairTax Act (HR 25, S 296) is nonpartisan legislation.

The evidence :

Americans For Fair Taxation: Co-Sponsor Gallery

Supported overwhelmingly/brought by/drafted by Republicans.

In Congress :

Americans For Fair Taxation:

Opposed by both Republicans & Democrats.

The only thing 'non-partisan' about this is the universal opposition to it. The legislation itself is clearly right winged. Please stop playing semantics and call a duck a duck?
So the bill has support of more Republicans than Dems by far. That does not necessarily make the whole movement partisan as it is something far more than a Republican tactic and organ.

What is the point of talking about partisan in any other way? So it attracts more rightwingers? That's a pretty big group. It can't please everyone so talking about partisanism for that reason is a little silly.

What do you expect it to please communists(and I'm not even talking about the dems.:2razz:) or anarcho-primitivists?
 
Last edited:
So the bill has support of more Republicans than Dems by far.

And drafted and brought up in Congress etc. But hey. Glad you're finally on the same page as the rest of us.

That does not necessarily make the whole movement partisan as it is something far more than a Republican tactic and organ.

The fact that an idea is supported by an overwhelmingly Republican majority is not a sign that it is partisan in nature? Really? If it was non-partisan which in this case is bull**** or bipartisan(supported by both sides) why don't we see left wing or Democrat support for it? PLEASE I beg you to stop playing semantics?

What is the point of talking about partisan in any other way? So it attracts more rightwingers? That's a pretty big group. It can't please everyone so talking about partisanism for that reason is a little silly.

What do you expect it to please communists(and I'm not even talking about the dems.:2razz:) or anarcho-primitivists?

So it is partisan. You just don't want to call it partisan. Sorry. From the start I think the idea of a 'fair tax' is bull****. It is the typical right wing labeling of ideas they have and consider 'righteous'. Think 'Homeland Security', 'Patriot Act' and 'Coalition of the Willing'. The difference is that while those ideas were supported by a large percentage of people in an almost non-partisan way. The only thing 'non-partisan' about this is it's rejection by both sides of congress.
 
And drafted and brought up in Congress etc. But hey. Glad you're finally on the same page as the rest of us.
Any point to these hostile comments?

You do know the fair tax movement has existed for quite some time before this bill was brought up.

The fact that an idea is supported by an overwhelmingly Republican majority is not a sign that it is partisan in nature? Really? If it was non-partisan which in this case is bull**** or bipartisan(supported by both sides) why don't we see left wing or Democrat support for it? PLEASE I beg you to stop playing semantics?

So it is partisan. You just don't want to call it partisan. Sorry. From the start I think the idea of a 'fair tax' is bull****. It is the typical right wing labeling of ideas they have and consider 'righteous'. Think 'Homeland Security', 'Patriot Act' and 'Coalition of the Willing'. The difference is that while those ideas were supported by a large percentage of people in an almost non-partisan way. The only thing 'non-partisan' about this is it's rejection by both sides of congress.
So what is your point? The fact it draws more support from one side of the spectrum makes it "partisan" or in fact from one ideology. That is a basically a use of the term partisan to make that meaningless.

You've basically consigned almost all issues and ideas to the partisan bin, well done.:roll:

I look forward to you trying to advocate for basically anything that is non-partisan in the future by your strange definition.
 
I tried doing that but found that he spoke in such a way that I'd first have to know exactly what led him to those conclusions before I could go over individual points.

Here, let me refute your argument as effectively as you've presented yours. You are so mind bogglingly wrong that I don't even know where to begin with it. It's like every word is just wrong. It has even magically made me start to support the Fair tax, if you can believe it.:shock:.

Actually, my argument uses a smiley, so it is by default MORE effective than your. So there!
 
Why should we support any federal tax? There is enough revenue generated from other sources to maintain the budget from ten years ago. Instead of supporting the spending spree congress/Bush/Obama have been on, perhaps we should tighten our purse strings and get our house in order. :twocents:
 
Lets call this what it really is.. a national sales tax, not a "fair tax".
The wealthy conservatives may agree to this, evidently, they will pay less and the working man will pay more....
Either way, the feds need the money.
But they have grown far too big and must be reduced in size.. The military needs to shrink, we must stay away from the wars and "democracy" spreading.
Yes, I think IRAQ is a better country now, but at such a cost of American lives...and American money..
I say we change what needs to be changed; leave the IRS as is,, for now, I think it is the fairest method of taxing..
What must be changed is the spending.....
 
Here, let me refute your argument as effectively as you've presented yours. You are so mind bogglingly wrong that I don't even know where to begin with it. It's like every word is just wrong. It has even magically made me start to support the Fair tax, if you can believe it.:shock:.

Actually, my argument uses a smiley, so it is by default MORE effective than your. So there!

I was honestly trying to respond to your post but was frustrated by the lack of specificness so just wrote what was on my mind. So I apologize for my arrogant and offensive post.
 
I was honestly trying to respond to your post but was frustrated by the lack of specificness so just wrote what was on my mind. So I apologize for my arrogant and offensive post.

He lacks specificity but somehow you still managed through your magick-like mental abilities to deduce that he was wrong. Odd. You still haven't said why he's wrong. We're waiting with baited breath.
 
He lacks specificity but somehow you still managed through your magick-like mental abilities to deduce that he was wrong. Odd. You still haven't said why he's wrong. We're waiting with baited breath.

I apologized for posting it, can't we just move on?
 
The FairTax Act (HR 25, S 296) is nonpartisan legislation. It abolishes all federal personal and corporate income taxes, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, and self-employment taxes and replaces them with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax administered primarily by existing state sales tax authorities.

The FairTax taxes us only on what we choose to spend on new goods or services, not on what we earn. The FairTax is a fair, efficient, transparent, and intelligent solution to the frustration and inequity of our current tax system.

The FairTax:

-Enables workers to keep their entire paychecks

-Enables retirees to keep their entire pensions

-Refunds in advance the tax on purchases of basic necessities

-Allows American products to compete fairly

-Brings transparency and accountability to tax policy

-Ensures Social Security and Medicare funding

-Closes all loopholes and brings fairness to taxation

-Abolishes the IRS

Click here to see the national petition.

I've been a supporter of the Fair Tax for some time now.

The current tax code is manipulated in so many ways giving favors to so many undeserving people that something needs to change.
 
One thing that I think people tend to miss in this debate is the idea that the wealthy will pay more taxes, but will get more value for it, i.e. if you add a voluntary nature to the equation, the wealthy have more discretionary income, therefore consume more, they get their desired goods and services, and don't have to hold over income because of the randomness of the current code, no penalties, no withholding, no "April budget", etc. When people will know how much they retain, they will spend accordingly, and taxes are just a natural extension of purchasing.
 
One thing that I think people tend to miss in this debate is the idea that the wealthy will pay more taxes, but will get more value for it, i.e. if you add a voluntary nature to the equation, the wealthy have more discretionary income, therefore consume more, they get their desired goods and services, and don't have to hold over income because of the randomness of the current code, no penalties, no withholding, no "April budget", etc. When people will know how much they retain, they will spend accordingly, and taxes are just a natural extension of purchasing.

:thumbs: Exactly, it is a naturally progressive tax.

No need to augment percentages based on income.
 
I really do love the fair tax, even if it is for different reasons then other people.

I am fine with the theory of an income tax, but a tax on consumption is much better for the economy then a tax on income. If we had the Fair Tax it would have been much less likely that we would have spent so much and got into this mess.


I was looking through this thread though, and I don't think I saw anyone that would rather have an income tax instead of the Fair Tax with everything else staying the same. But there is some people that voted against the Fair Tax in the poll.

I just wanted to hear any sides of their reasoning for that.
 
a fair tax strips congress of much of its illegitimate power
 
Why should we support any federal tax? There is enough revenue generated from other sources to maintain the budget from ten years ago. Instead of supporting the spending spree congress/Bush/Obama have been on, perhaps we should tighten our purse strings and get our house in order. :twocents:

What, do something that makes sense? Damn it man, we're talking about Washington, so get your head screwed on straight and worship the Messiah and everything his Holiness does, okay?
 
I think people who are in power are against the fair tax are against it because they feel it gives the citizens to much power its obvious how much tax people are paying therefor they control the spending rather than the government.Its a simple idea and government hates simple ideas.

Oh, a simple idea to get the people to know how much the government is stealing from them is this:

Make the people write the government a check every month for taxes, just like they pay mortgages and electric bills. Self-employed people do just that, usually quarterly, and there's no reason the wage earner couldn't be given a statement by their employer telling them their tax liability for the week or month.

Why won't this simple idea gain traction? Because it would work it's intended purpose and make people KNOW what they're losing by an out of control government.

Another idea is to move the tax filing deadline to Halloween. Gee Halloween is just a week before the Congressthings get elected. That would influence elections, can't have that.

I'm fine with a national sales tax given one caveat: The Sixteenth Amendment authorizing income taxation is repealed first. But that's a national sales tax, applied solely at the point of sale, as the states apply it, not some comlicated confounded VAT where the total tax is hidden from the people in the purchase price.

I'm betting Mr. Transparency, the Messiah Hisself, would stand in firm opposition to the above ideas, because they produce true transparency in an essential aspect of government.
 
The absurd complexity of our tax system has little to do with the type of tax used. You can make sales taxes just as complex as income tax if you feel like it and vice versa.

And given our Congress's history, they are going to make it extremely complex. Big Corporate business is going to get the exemptions and special deductions they've always had, the poor will pay little to no taxes, loopholes for the rich will be enacted and we'd have spent lots of money on a system no better than the one it replaces while risking Congress implementing both an income tax and sales tax. Remember, there's not a damn thing to stop them from merely not eliminating the income tax.
 
And given our Congress's history, they are going to make it extremely complex. Big Corporate business is going to get the exemptions and special deductions they've always had, the poor will pay little to no taxes, loopholes for the rich will be enacted and we'd have spent lots of money on a system no better than the one it replaces while risking Congress implementing both an income tax and sales tax. Remember, there's not a damn thing to stop them from merely not eliminating the income tax.
I'd suggest reading the Fair tax book, but yeah, Washington would probably find a way to screw it up.
 
I'd suggest reading the Fair tax book, but yeah, Washington would probably find a way to screw it up.

Oh I understand Fair tax, and in theory isn't a bad idea. But someone else pointed this out to me a long time ago. When Congress enacts the bill to change the tax system there's absolutely nothing stopping it from repealing the part where it repeals the current system. So we risk having both tax systems at the same time. Furthermore, Congress has historically a hard time getting rid of taxes once they enact them.
 
Oh I understand Fair tax, and in theory isn't a bad idea. But someone else pointed this out to me a long time ago. When Congress enacts the bill to change the tax system there's absolutely nothing stopping it from repealing the part where it repeals the current system. So we risk having both tax systems at the same time. Furthermore, Congress has historically a hard time getting rid of taxes once they enact them.
Understandable, and it looks like that is exactly where they are trying to take things now, if they do, it'll probably result in yet another change in Washington for 2010, but then who knows, they'll probably end up worse the way things are going.
 
Oh I understand Fair tax, and in theory isn't a bad idea. .
I disagree. It is still a tax on labour.

It is to Henry George that we must turn for the best taxation solution. It is a solution that not only does not tax individual labour but also helps to establish distributive justice and remedy the ills of private ownership of land and natural resources.
 
Back
Top Bottom