First off there have been studies to show that the FairTax would allow the revenue to stay the same, if not grow. And guess what? People have to buy things; People want to buy things. It's human nature to indulge ourselves.
Ok, thanks. I'm sure if this idea were to ever be taken seriously, which I highly doubt, there would be plenty of studies to contradict this too. The line about people having to buy things and that they want to buy things and that its human nature to indulge ourselves...... Guess what? Thats exactly the problem I have with this assanine plan. The middle, and lower, class gets screwed by this. I know you'll talk about your prebate/prorate/whatever idea, but I'll get to that in a sec.
Are you ready for this? You're wrong! Flat out wrong. Under our current system there is a 22% embedded tax on typical consumer products. If the FairTax plan were to pass, that embedded tax would be removed (along with payroll taxes, SS taxes, Medicare, so and and so forth) and be replaced with a 23% sales tax. Something that costs $100 now would cost something like $101 afterwards, BUT you are getting, on average, a 25-30% larger paycheck. Seems to work out pretty well doesn't it? You liberals just can't seem to use logic can you?
About the prebates. There is a formula in the FairTax Bill that sets out how much money the government thinks you should be spending over the course of a year (depending on your marital status, children, income) on necessities (food, clothes, etc.) and determines how much of that amount is the 23% sales tax and pays you that amount back over the course of 12 months. This prevents the rich from getting money back because they "need" a $300,000 car. So in reality, the rich are paying more than the poor anyway you slice it... which I'm sure you love.
I think I loved this diatribe most. Talk about a walking contradiction, this fairytale entails that the rich will be carrying the burden of our government upon their backs while working class families rejoice in their new liberated financial freedoms thus allowing them a better quality of life. There's no guarantees in any of what you said to that measure. Spout off numbers any which way and it still doesn't make sense. For instance, if I were Bill Gates, I would become an expatriot so fast it would make your head swim. So would the rest of the rich. After all, they're already rich and could easily afford to live where they please.
This one was the kicker, under your idea of
prebates, called proration elsewhere <img src="/~stretch/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />, families would have an adjustment to what their buying status would be and would thus be allowed subsidizing on that base. FUCKING LAUGH OUT LOUD!!!!!!! Explain just how the government would come anywhere close to accurately doing this. People are all far too different in their lifestyles to accurately predict this and there are soooo many factors. Just how would you know what people spent money on? Would they have to save and send in ALL of their receipts by April 15th?? That's rich.
Last, but not least, you have neglected to mention state and local government. Current sales tax, from state to state, is used to subsidize state and local government. So, we're going to put on 23% on top of 6-10% local sales tax? Great!! Now this is really starting to make sense.
"Next argument please." You've yet to make this shit float. Matter of fact, between the many posts in support of this, I fail to see real consistency of the grasp of what the book must actually say. Most of you are nothing more than conglomerates of your authoritative sources. You're completely failing to think realistically.
