A Candidate-Free Discussion

[tomspug]

Hi, everybody. The primaries are almost over, so from now on there's going to be a lot more discussion between the differences across party lines. This is best done without focusing on specific candidates and simply focusing on the issues.

But I've been kind of frustrated with some of the political threads around here, so I was hoping I could set up some ground rules.

1) Do not write a post generalizing entire groups or ideologies in a demeaning way.
2) Do not call the candidates names or question their intelligence (is this really so hard to do?)
3) Steer clear of debates that center on the character or intelligence of a specific candidate.

Keep your opinions to yourself if you just think a candidate has helium for brains. You're only hurting your own arguments if you don't. I really would just like a thread where people can talk about the issues instead of the personalities or characteristics of candidates. Let's just focus on what certain candidates will or will not DO in the White House, and what they should or should not DO.

Anyways, I'll start it off by asking about the Fair Tax. Both Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee support the abolishment of the IRS. The Fair Tax is a very popular (but not widely-accepted) alternative. Essentially, it's purpose is to eliminate the ability for the rich, the illegal, and the underground to dodge taxes by issuing a flat sales tax on the free-market. Whoever spends more gets taxed more. There would be no more taxes on investments and interest.

What do you think are the positives and negatives to this issue?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

What do you think are the positives and negatives to this issue

I think that calling it a "Fair Tax" is intellectually dishonest propaganda. It is a free ride for the rich, who are the only ones who will benefit from it due to tax-free investments and interest. The poor will not be able to afford even less than what they can now, and the wealthy will be able to make even more money than they do now.

Also, will the rich be buying enough stuff to sustain the government? Or will we even have a government with the person who is senseless enough to enact such a tax?

 

[tomspug]

Actually, the reasons that the rich don't pay many taxes is because they use loopholes and hire economists to dodge taxes. A 'flat' tax means that it can't be dodged.

The rich will HAVE to spend more on taxes if they buy more than other people. How can you get around that?

The truth is that 40% of your income goes to the government because of the IRS. If that is eliminated and replaced with an 18% tax that is entirely dependent on spending, how is that a burden to the poor? It rewards those that DON'T spend rather than people that do.

 

[Smoke]

Anyways, I'll start it off by asking about the Fair Tax. Both Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee support the abolishment of the IRS. The Fair Tax is a very popular (but not widely-accepted) alternative. Essentially, it's purpose is to eliminate the ability for the rich, the illegal, and the underground to dodge taxes by issuing a flat sales tax on the free-market. Whoever spends more gets taxed more. There would be no more taxes on investments and interest.

What do you think are the positives and negatives to this issue?

The illegal and the underground will always dodge taxes. The "Fair Tax" would be a windfall for the rich in that it would eliminate not only income taxes but capital gains taxes, corporate taxes, gift taxes, and estate taxes. It's a huge scam.

 

[tomspug]

The illegal and the underground will always dodge taxes. The "Fair Tax" would be a windfall for the rich in that it would eliminate not only income taxes but capital gains taxes, corporate taxes, gift taxes, and estate taxes. It's a huge scam.

HOW can illegals and black markets dodge sales tax? And if the Fair Tax is so great, how come none of the "rich conservatives" are supporting Huckabee? Do a double-take, all the rich people are flocking to ROMNEY because he's a fiscal conservative. The rich LIKE the IRS.

 

[Smoke]

HOW can illegals and black markets dodge sales tax?

Did you really just ask me how black markets can dodge sales tax? As for illegals, If you can work off the books, you can buy off the books.

And if the Fair Tax is so great, how come none of the "rich conservatives" are supporting Huckabee? Do a double-take, all the rich people are flocking to ROMNEY because he's a fiscal conservative. The rich LIKE the IRS.

AFFT was founded by millionaires and has spent $20 million promoting the "Fair Tax." If that's your idea of poor folks, you're doing a lot better than I am.

 

[doppelganger]

The problem with the so-called "Fair Tax" is that it depends on not understanding the nature of "disposable income." Lower income people will end up spending a larger proportion of their income because they have no choice. Thus, lower income people will pay a larger proportion of their income in taxes than will people who can afford to accumulate wealth. It would, in practice, largely eliminate the graduated nature of the tax system that accounts for the role of disparities in disposable income between individuals.

And quicker than you can say "Jack Robinson" there'd be an army of lobbyists and their paid for congresspersons writing new "loopholes" into it . . . so it can't solve what it claims to solve anyway . . .

 

[Wandered Off]

One major sticking point with the "Fair Tax" is that, to be true to its intent, we would have to repeal the 16th amendment. Failure to do that would put taxpayers in jeopardy of this high consumption tax and federal income taxes - and it will be justified by politicians scrambling to pay off the massive national debt coming due to future generations. To be safe, the constitution would have to be amended before enacting this, and that seems unlikely to me.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

It's more humane to (poison) gas the poor rather than to starve them to death and legally ensure that they cannot get healthcare.

 

[Wandered Off]

The monthly government rebates are supposed to prevent that, but it brings up another point: These rebates mean that money changes hands needlessly. It would be more efficient to simply not tax the same necessities that politicians had in mind with the rebates in the first place, but then having different classes of goods adds its own complexity.

 

[tomspug]

It's more humane to (poison) gas the poor rather than to starve them to death and legally ensure that they cannot get healthcare.

Who is starving in America? There are soup kitchens in every city, aren't there? Explain this statement.

 

[tomspug]

One major sticking point with the "Fair Tax" is that, to be true to its intent, we would have to repeal the 16th amendment. Failure to do that would put taxpayers in jeopardy of this high consumption tax and federal income taxes - and it will be justified by politicians scrambling to pay off the massive national debt coming due to future generations. To be safe, the constitution would have to be amended before enacting this, and that seems unlikely to me.

Well, it would seem to me that they would repeal the 16th amendment and enact the fair tax in one bill. Isn't it possible to do that?

 

[doppelganger]

Well, it would seem to me that they would repeal the 16th amendment and enact the fair tax in one bill. Isn't it possible to do that?

No it isn't. Amending the Constitution requires a lot more than simply passing a piece of legislation.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I fail to see how you can buy a car, "off the books". I fail to see how you can build a home, "off the books". I fail to see how you can eat out, "off the books". I fail to see how you can fly abroad, "off the books".

Rich people like convenience. They will not be happy with the TV you have on the back of a truck, they want Geek Squad to install it and some one to warranty the TV. They want a special model, or certain designer clothes.

Lets face it, they spend boo koo bucks and they will pay boo koo taxes.

The little guy gets his whole paycheck plus a prebate check. The bum under the bridge gets a check every month, far more than he has right now.

There will be no poor because everyone receives a check that raises them above the poverty line.

There will always be cheats, but far more people will be paying taxes under the fair tax and far more rich folks will have no choice but to spend less or pay more taxes.

The best part of the fair tax is you pay as you go and you will not have to have receipts, keep books or stress about filling out the right forms or doing your taxes correctly.

No tax audits or writing a check every year to the government. The fair tax is simple, easy, and would make everyone equal participants in the responsibility they have as Americans.

If politicians spend too much money, we all share the burden. NO MORE FREE CANDY!

 

[doppelganger]

They will not be happy with the TV you have on the back of a truck, they want Geek Squad to install it and some one to warranty the TV. They want a special model, or certain designer clothes.

Read The Millionaire Next Door. Most of the very wealthy value money and the more money it can make them more highly than they value fancy cars, big houses and LCD TVs. In the vast majority of cases, that's how they got rich in the first place: fiscal prudence.

 

[yossarian22]

Rich people like convenience. They will not be happy with the TV you have on the back of a truck, they want Geek Squad to install it and some one to warranty the TV. They want a special model, or certain designer clothes.

Lets face it, they spend boo koo bucks and they will pay boo koo taxes.

Until they bore loopholes into the tax with lobbyists. You can dodge taxes now, you can dodges taxes under the fair tax.

The little guy gets his whole paycheck plus a prebate check. The bum under the bridge gets a check every month, far more than he has right now.

You can't beat zero. People under 18 with a child don't pay taxes on their first $30,000~ of income.

There will be no poor because everyone receives a check that raises them above the poverty line.

Is this some kind of joke?

The tax is expected to increase the tax burder on incomes below $30,000. This tax is not any simpler, it just shifts the area of complexity away from sight. It won't eliminate the IRS (despite what some claim). Unless you think people will voluntarily pay their taxes.

The fair tax is almost as bad as the gold standard.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Until they bore loopholes into the tax with lobbyists. You can dodge taxes now, you can dodges taxes under the fair tax.

You can't beat zero. People under 18 with a child don't pay taxes on their first $30,000~ of income.


Is this some kind of joke?

The tax is expected to increase the tax burder on incomes below $30,000. This tax is not any simpler, it just shifts the area of complexity away from sight. It won't eliminate the IRS (despite what some claim). Unless you think people will voluntarily pay their taxes.

The fair tax is almost as bad as the gold standard.

The Gold standard keeps government from spending money they don't have in the first place. It keeps our dollar strong.

 

[yossarian22]

The Gold standard keeps government from spending money they don't have in the first place. It keeps our dollar strong.

Eh, thats not the gold standard, that's legal tender (which is admittedly tied to the gold standard). The gold standard does not stop borrowing in the slightest, legal tender does. Legal tender is idiotic because it creates a vicious cycle during panics from hyper inflation.

Going back to the gold standard, the stupidest thing conceivable. Gold has no intrinsic value beyond jewelry and some industrial use. Gold only has value because (surprise surprise) we give it value. So we are basically tying our currency to the value of a commodity.
Now, using the simplest economic rule, we can show that the gold standard is moronic. So lets say a new gold rush starts, say, in <Arbitrary location 'X'>. The market is now flooded in gold. Now its a simple supply and demand problem. The supply of gold has rapidly outpaced demand. What happens to the value of gold? it drops. And our dollar has the additional benefit of hyperinflation. So, where is the advantage of the gold standard?
The arguments against the fiat system are all based off of 1929, where we had our heads up our collective ***es or lack empirical evidence.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Read The Millionaire Next Door. Most of the very wealthy value money and the more money it can make them more highly than they value fancy cars, big houses and LCD TVs. In the vast majority of cases, that's how they got rich in the first place: fiscal prudence.

Thats exactly right. The people we see and think are rich are actually in debt up to their eyeballs. Old farmers who wear bib overalls and shovel out stalls full of poop driving muddy pickup trucks may have a higher net worth than the guy with the diamond ring and the BMW.

 

[Scott C.]

The Fair Tax is a very popular (but not widely-accepted) alternative. Essentially, it's purpose is to eliminate the ability for the rich, the illegal, and the underground to dodge taxes by issuing a flat sales tax on the free-market. Whoever spends more gets taxed more. There would be no more taxes on investments and interest.

What do you think are the positives and negatives to this issue?

I would love to see income tax and the IRS abolished. Money does you no good until you spend it. With a flat tax, when you spend it, you're realizing the benefit and pay tax at that time. However, I would first need to calculate how it would affect the middle and lower class. Are some purchases exempt from the tax? What happens to the total tax of a middle class family who currently writes off mortgage interest, charitable contributions, children, etc.? It seems these deductions would disappear. A person making $75k per year with no kids would pay the exact same tax as someone making the same amount with kids, assuming they both spend all of their money in the year. Someone in the middle class will end up paying a lot more tax than they do now, it would seem.