Hambone 0 #1 January 6, 2006 I just returned from hearing the Congress man that came up with the idea speak. It seems like a very good idea. Anyone else have ideas? I want to hear what people have to say...Yeah...You need to grow up. -Skymama Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #2 January 6, 2006 Can you sum up his proposal for us? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #3 January 6, 2006 Which Congressman? Billy Tauzin? And which "Fair Tax" was he speaking about? There are different ideas about that. hell, there are a large number of people out there that think a 100 percent tax on yearly income over $100k dollars is fair. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unformed 0 #4 January 6, 2006 http://www.fairtax.org/ QuoteSimply put, the FairTax replaces the way we're currently taxed - based on our annual income - with a tax on goods and services. The FairTax is a voluntary “consumption" tax: the more you buy, the more you pay in taxes, the less you buy, the less you pay in taxes. It's simple. Everyone pays their fair share of taxes, and with the FairTax rebate, spending up to the poverty level is tax free. The Federal government is fully funded, including Social Security and Medicare, and you don't need an expert to determine your Federal taxes. It's simple. i'm just quoting ... don't know what it's really aboutThis ad space for sale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #5 January 6, 2006 I like the idea, but what happens is the 'enlightened' take this concept and then start to add special interest exceptions for 'certain' groups of their defining. But it would drive our gas prices up to the Euro's level.... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EricTheRed 0 #6 January 6, 2006 QuoteI just returned from hearing the Congress man that came up with the idea speak. It seems like a very good idea. Anyone else have ideas? I want to hear what people have to say... I'm all for a consumption based tax in theory. My primary caveat is that the other taxes already in existance are eliminated. I'll get flack for this, but I also feel there should be an estate tax, this could be included at the same rate as the consumption tax, treated as a transfer. A system like this invites a very active black market though...illegible usually Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hambone 0 #7 January 6, 2006 QuoteWhich Congressman? Billy Tauzin? And which "Fair Tax" was he speaking about? There are different ideas about that. hell, there are a large number of people out there that think a 100 percent tax on yearly income over $100k dollars is fair. I understand that i just want to know why they think that way. The idea is to repeal all income tax totally. and instute a consumption tax, or a national sales tax on goods and services. The implications of this are wide spread, it will put a large sum of money back into the economy and will open up the US to international business more so than it already is. It will also help alleviate any issue that people have with migrant/illegal workers because they will get taxed too when they goto the store to purchase their goods. It is a tax on wealth not income. The reason for needing it is that in 30 some odd years the income from all tax will not even service the debt. I am stating what i heard, not my opinion so don't attack me but feel free to attack the ideas...Thats why i put them up here.Yeah...You need to grow up. -Skymama Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hambone 0 #8 January 6, 2006 QuoteQuoteI just returned from hearing the Congress man that came up with the idea speak. It seems like a very good idea. Anyone else have ideas? I want to hear what people have to say... I'm all for a consumption based tax in theory. My primary caveat is that the other taxes already in existance are eliminated. I'll get flack for this, but I also feel there should be an estate tax, this could be included at the same rate as the consumption tax, treated as a transfer. A system like this invites a very active black market though... An integral part of his plan is that the two(income and consumption tax) can not exist at the same time.Yeah...You need to grow up. -Skymama Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EricTheRed 0 #9 January 6, 2006 The third leg is the property tax. While there is no federal property tax, all the states (so far as I know) and many localalities, have property taxes as well. Simply owning property should not result in taxation.illegible usually Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hambone 0 #10 January 6, 2006 QuoteThe third leg is the property tax. While there is no federal property tax, all the states (so far as I know) and many localalities, have property taxes as well. Simply owning property should not result in taxation. Under his plan the only tax would be buying it (that is as i understand it. he does a great job explaining it i am failing miserably. please don't judge the plan on my inability to express)Yeah...You need to grow up. -Skymama Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AlexCrowley 0 #11 January 6, 2006 Talk about deceptive practices. No rollercoaster, no ferris wheel. Not good, I can't see how this would ever pass. The dog said I should give him more jelly beans. TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #12 January 6, 2006 Quote[so don't attack me but feel free to attack the ideas.... (Arther Dent?) You're a wanker. A real knee biter. (makes a check on a clipboard and goes back to his ship) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #13 January 6, 2006 The fair tax will disproportionately penalize people who have to spend a larger percentage of their income simply to survive. Let's say the tax is 10% on what you spend. These expenses are not realistic, but they serve to illustrate. e.g.: if you make $1000/mo as a single person, you spend $300 to rent a room, and $150/mo on food if you cook reasonably well. Transportation costs $120/mo. That's $570/mo. You therefore pay $57 in tax, which is 5.7% of your income, and you have $373 for all other expenses. Now let's say you make instead $10,000/mo as a single person. You have an apartment at $2000/mo, you spend $500/mo on your vehicle, and $250 on food, and $500 on entertainment. That's $3250. You therefore pay $325 in tax, which is 3.25% of your income, and you have $6425 for all other expenses. No one expects the guy living on $1000/mo to live as well as the guy making 10 times as much, including that guy. But it's not an equal percentage of their incomes. I know I have a lot more money left at the end of the month now that I make more, than when I was making less, even though I was living quite frugally (I was skydiving as a self-supporting college student -- I do understand frugal). Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hambone 0 #14 January 6, 2006 QuoteQuote[so don't attack me but feel free to attack the ideas.... (Arther Dent?) You're a wanker. A real knee biter. (makes a check on a clipboard and goes back to his ship) I am not sure if i understand you? you are angry at me for wanting to hear peoples opions? Thats a little ridiculous don't you think?Yeah...You need to grow up. -Skymama Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hambone 0 #15 January 6, 2006 I understand you meaning and as i said i am just trying to get a feel for the pro's and con's of this idea. i am going to pick up the book this week from my parents and will be able to argue a bit more intellegently about it then. But until then... Blue Skies. I hope that everyone has a wonderful weekend.Yeah...You need to grow up. -Skymama Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #16 January 6, 2006 Incorrect. What do you think the more well to do person in your example would do with that $6425? Mysteriously spend it out of the country simply to avoid the tax? Get real. He or she is going to be spending it on goods and services - most of which will be...you guessed it - TAXED. The Fair Tax is a superb idea. I'm in favor of a flat tax in conjunction with a national retail sales tax (exempting gas and groceries) myself, but like the Fair Tax much better than our Marx/Engels-esque progressive[sic] tax system. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #17 January 6, 2006 QuoteIncorrect. What do you think the more well to do person in your example would do with that $6425? Mysteriously spend it out of the country simply to avoid the tax? Get real. He or she is going to be spending it on goods and services - most of which will be...you guessed it - TAXED. The Fair Tax is a superb idea. I'm in favor of a flat tax in conjunction with a national retail sales tax (exempting gas and groceries) myself, but like the Fair Tax much better than our Marx/Engels-esque progressive[sic] tax system. Wendy also missed the part about exempting the first X number of dollars of the tax as part of the deal. That is specifically targetted to handle cost of living concerns for EVERYBODY, not just the poor. Quotespending up to the poverty level is tax free HAMBONE - If I have to put in for Douglas Adams' quotes concerning randomly insulting and attacking people, especially when they explicitly ask others not to, then I'm going home. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #18 January 6, 2006 QuoteI just returned from hearing the Congress man that came up with the idea speak. It seems like a very good idea. Anyone else have ideas? I want to hear what people have to say... While a flat 23% sales tax would be a nice reduction it doesn't address the fundamental problem with our current democracy and tax system: other people get to vote (indirectly) on how much money to take from you and then how it gets spent. Restraint and frugality go out the window when it's some one else's money. My fair solution is to send every one a bill for their share Take the federal budget: $2,700,000,000,000 Divide by the population: 295,734,134 Subtotal: $9129 Your tax bill is the subtotal times the size of your family. Exceptions might be made for those too young and old to work. In 2003 41 million of the 130 million people who filed tax returns paid nothing because of credits, exemptions, and deductions. When those guys start paying for what they've voted for they're going to have to get serious about having a smaller government. Back in 1913 the federal government did fine with a top marginal tax rate of 7%. In 2003 dollars the exemption for single people was $54,567, married couples' $72,756. The next $363,783 was taxed at 1%. Only earnings over $9,094,578 were subject to the outrageous 7% rate. That's the sort of tax reform I want. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dan_iv 0 #19 January 6, 2006 Quote No one expects the guy living on $1000/mo to live as well as the guy making 10 times as much, including that guy. But it's not an equal percentage of their incomes. Wendy W. and the amount paid on income tax / property tax / etc... is and equal percentage of peoples income? no way. the more you make the higher income tax bracket you pay i.e. more percentage. the percentage thing never really equals out on property tax as it varies great depending on many factors such as city / county / school district you live in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,589 #20 January 6, 2006 I definitely missed the part about spending up to the poverty level is free. Makes a big difference. Ready --- Fire --- read material Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #21 January 6, 2006 QuoteExceptions might be made for those too young and old to work. Why? Do they not benefit from Defense, Roads, Parks, Education, and Law? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #22 January 6, 2006 QuoteI definitely missed the part about spending up to the poverty level is free. Makes a big difference. An exemption on the First x thousand dollars of income or spending makes a progressive rate tax structure by definition. But at least it's palatable by some kind of logic. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #23 January 6, 2006 And what about being a skydiver? $500 a month on entertainment? Sure..."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #24 January 6, 2006 Quote An exemption on the First x thousand dollars of income or spending makes a progressive rate tax structure by definition. Only if you assume that all people are going to spend every dollar they make. In reality, they will not. This is a horribly regressive tax structure. Percentage wise, as your income increases the percentage of it you will pay in tax decreases. Wendy's example was a good one. People who would be able would drastically change their spending habits under that system. I know I would. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #25 January 6, 2006 >What do you think the more well to do person in your example would > do with that $6425? Mysteriously spend it out of the country simply > to avoid the tax? Get real. He or she is going to be spending it on > goods and services . . . . Warren Buffet recently spoke to this when talking about the capital gains tax. He made it quite clear that he would simply end up with a few million extra that would sit in the bank; it would not re-enter circulation. People with extra money often save it. People who cannot afford to save don't, and thus would be taxed most heavily (as a percentage of their income) under this scheme. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
