Fair Tax

I propose that an electronic transfer tax would be reasonable if cash money and checks were eliminated. Less than 2% of the American money in circulation is cash and half of THAT is held in foreign countries.

If ALL money was taxed then the net tax could be cut because half of the income in this country is sub rosa. The only people who can't effectively cheat are those working exclusively for the government or big companies. Most everyone else can work under the table and that is why the system will not be changed, our sin nature!

 

Call it what you want, but the fact is, when one is a liberal, bleeding heart Democrat, the more times the money can make it through a transaction to be taxed, the happier you are. That means more money for the government to redistribute, plus an expanded roll of government in our lives.

 

I was actually questioning whether this was a good alternative because it seemed to tax the same wages over and over again. That is the opposite of what you're saying but that's not unusual.

 

You questioning whether it is a good idea does not change the fact that the heart of a socialist liberal is for higher taxes, more spending, and supporting individuals who will not support themselves and are as healthy as you or me.

 

"Fair tax" is NOT a sales tax. It is a tax on the selling price plus an imputed sales tax.

From WIKI:

>"The sales tax rate, as defined in the legislation, is 23 percent of the total payment including the tax ($23 of every $100 spent in total—calculated similar to income taxes). This would be equivalent to a 30 percent traditional U.S. sales tax ($23 on top of every $77 spent—$100 total).[4]


>"With the rebate taken into consideration, the FairTax would be progressive on consumption,[3] but would also be regressive on income at higher income levels (as consumption falls as a percentage of income) . . . ."


see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairTax

 

To me a national sales tax with limitations would be a fair way to tax people. This would tax people according to their spending habits & not penalize them according to how much they make.

A person could legitimately control the amount of tax they pay to the government by controlling the things they buy. If someone has a personal beef with Uncle Sam, then all they have to do is boycott the taxed items. If enough people get angered by what the government does, then our political leaders would be forced to listen, as they would not be generating any government revenue.

I wouldn't apply the tax toward food, oil, individual clothing items under $50.00, or on school & office supplies from July 1st to August 1st.

Churches could still have tax emempt status. Wealthy people could not avoid paying the tax by using loop holes (I have always heard the Democrats talking about that).

Then to also save money, I would drasticly cut the number of federal bureacracies that we have. There would be less government spending on these wasteful agencies. The Department of Education, The IRS, Endowment for the Arts, & Alcohol Tobacco & Firearms would be the first ones to go.

 

TV preachers could still deduct their jet planes? Businesses could order a year's office supply in Sept?

You all catch on slowly. The worker who needs to spend 80% of his pay could pay more than the rich person who lives on 10% of his annual increase.

Would rent be exempt? If so, I can think of some sweet lease back deals. Car leases?

 

I wasn't referring to televangelists, I was referring to churches. If someone could afford to have his own personal jet, then I'm sure he can afford to pay for a vacation to some tropical paradise.

If a business wanted to buy up a year's worth office office supplies then I don't see why they shouldn't. After all, I don't believe that there should be limitations on how much you can purchase, especially if you're not paying a tax on it. However, back to school shopping generally starts toward the end of summer, so that's why I would have a sales tax holiday for an entire month. This would give parents an extra edge on their back to school shopping for supplies. Since clothing under $50.00 wouldn't be taxed, they'd be covered.

In terms of rent & lease agreements, you are thinking of property taxes. I don't like property taxes. The national sales tax I would propose would not apply to any property taxes. That would be like taxing a tax.

I'm not sure I follow your logic on a worker spending 80% of his pay. This tax would apply to everyone regardless of what they earn. A wealthy person could not get out of paying a national sales tax by making a small charitable donation. This would mean that they would pay the same percentage of tax that a middle & lower class person would pay.

My plan wouldn't tax sodas, chips, or any sugary things (like Obama's) since they would be classified as food items. Yes, they are bad for you, but I don't think people should have to pay extra to enjoy those things.

 

If you feel the need to insuslt people you can't win debates with go ahead. I'd prefer to make you look like a fool.

 

It absolutely boggles my mind that no one on this list understands how and why people who live hand to mouth are much differently effected by sales taxes than are people who have great capital holdings and cash in a very small percentage of their annual increase in capital assets for their living expenses.

 

https://fc.standardandpoors.com/ondemand/analytics/embedded/compute.vm?hnd=8&client=amc

Median pay is around $40K/worker. Savings rate just jumped to 2% or $800/year. $800/year saved at 6% average for 45 years is less than $200k. With $200K in a retirement fund, withdrawing at a safe 4% yields 8K/year. If max SS is around $24K/year then the median retired person is retired on $32K/year and will leave his kids the $200K plus a paid off house worth maybe $350K.

The guy who is saving $1 million/year, you do the numbers. My point, the rich will continue to get richer and the middle class will continue to shrink. The difference between median income and mean income is skyrocketing.

 

I propose a 100% income tax for all income in excess of 100 times more than median income and a 100% estate tax for all assets over 100 times the median family net worth.

 

>Thus we need an very low % E-Tax (eg 1/2 %) with NO execptions. That means churches, schools, the poor, all pay the same % of tax when paying with check, credit card or internet. ALL direct cash payments would be tax free.

Cash is still handy for buying a paper and leaving tips, selling and buying dope, working under the table, cheating on taxes, giving brides, and buying politicians. Did I omit anything?