Mark, post my comments!
Last week he was hiding behind a 'no public read' wall.
Now he's hiding behind comment moderation.
(error code: bX-n3zkj6)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(14)
-
▼
June
(9)
- U.S. Freezes Solar Energy Projects
- Solar Energy boosts the bottom line every time
- FairTax 'absurdity' author wasn't hiding; just clu...
- Energy Storage - More sleight-of-hand
- Mark from FairTax Absurdity is a coward!
- Bob Brinker host of MoneyTalk blasts FairTax with ...
- Oil approaches $140 and no one is paying attention
- FairTax 'absurdity' author hides behind ignorance
- What is it about Solar Energy that frightens folks?
-
▼
June
(9)
About...
- ctyankee
- Known to make spontaneous utterances not in his own best interest, but won't let that interfere the fun of posting lively comments.
5 comments:
Well Mark,
It's a start. Now if you can agree that the Income tax taken in the same context is even worse, but somehow that made it work... Then you'll see that the effort to make the FairTax work is diminutive by comparison.
What it takes is that we have to throw out all the b.s. associated with the Income tax. Then we take about one-tenth of that effort and implement and execute the FairTax, and in less than a year we're all way way ahead of the game!
By not taxing 'income' investment will start flowing back into the US rather than fleeing to offshore accounts.
By not taxing savings the capital reserves that fuel growth, and productivity will flourish.
The only way the dayum boat is gonna sink is if the passengers & crew sabotage it. Within a year those dayum fish will be jumpin' into the dayum boat; actually the entire dayum fleet!
cty,
You say throw out all the bs associated with the income tax, fine with me. I like it.
But I disagree that Fairtax is a reasonable replacement. Its fine with me to try it, though. I'd throw the switch to enact it, if thats the only other choice we had.
But there is a better choice.
Just keep it simple, and tax all income type the same. Pick some group out to tax -- say self employed person, an investor, it doesnt matter.
Then give everyone that same deal. The entire tax code could be 10 pages. A tax return could be page.
Just tax all income type the same, let the market work.
Why is your investment in BN stock so wonderful that it should not be taxed at all, but my investment in my education as, say, a brain surgeon is so lacking in value, that I should be taxed 300% or infinetly higher than yours, and then have to pay FICA on top of that?
Have you ever watched two kids divide up a candy bar? Ive seen kids cut a candy bar 90% to the kid cutting it, and 10% to the other, and that kid will insist to high heavens it was even (sounds like a future Republican).
So have either kid cut the chocolate bar, and the other kid chose which half he wants, and you will be amazed at the precision of that cut. That kid that thought 90-10 looked far in his favor, will have that Hersey bar so evenly divided it would take a engineer and a microscope to judge which is bigger.
Tax laws should be that same way. There are essentially two types of income in our economy - so go ahead and let one side write the rules -- however they want the laws.
But just leave blank which type of income you are talking about. Leave out the name.
Then the other side pick which it wants.
That's how you get fairness. Anything else is half baked bullship, tricks, excuses, and deceptions.
You can always find cliches and excuses to justify things.
Fairtax is a perfect example of that They made the worst economic idea since slavery sound plausible, if you didn't pay attention to the details. If you listened to the promises and justifcations -- instead of the details, oh it sounds fantastic.
But its deeply flawed, as I have tried to show in my blog.
That's why I would really like to see Fairtax pass - honestly I would - we would all get an education on how functional those cliches are --or arent. It would be worth passing it just for that.
Why should I be taxed on my business income, on every penny I profit, when I spent 20 years and half million dollars builiding that business?
Investing in myself, in other words.In my ability. Hiring others, creating jobs for others, paying all kinds of taxes before I make a dime profit, providing a service, and taking risks.
But thats type of income is supposed to pay high taxes. Why?
But "investment capital" like money that would get Exxon dividends are supposed to be so wonderful, you don't think they should pay any taxes whatso ever.
Bull ship. Its not logical, and its not economically sound. Its mostly cliches and distortions that people learned to sharpen like knives.
There are two arguments for taxing earned income -- work -- far higher than investment income.
. One is the risk - reward ratio. Supposedly the risk in investing is so high, you need to sweeten the pot to get people to invest.
No doubt there are risks to investing. But there is tremendous risk to running and owning a print business, too. Any day of the week, one of my competitors may move in a Kinkos say, take my big account, and Im pretty much out of business.
The 20 years I put in, the million dollars I have invested in my buildings and equipment and training and good will are shot.
Plus, I can't unload my business in ten minutes, or with a click of the mouse. If I try to sell my business, its a huge ordeal. A stock investment and other investments can often be converted to cash very quickly, and have built in protections such as stop loss orders. The idea that these investors take so much risk is often overstated.
God bless the guy who invest in Exxon or whever he wants. Thats fine. I invest that way too. I get cap gains, dividends, from US and Canadian and Chinese stocks. Great.
But why should I get absurdly low tax on that, and high taxes on my work?
The other excuse for the idea that investment shouldnt pay taxes is that the money the person used to invest, was already taxed. Therefore, they claim any money made FROM that investment shouldnt be taxed.
Thats another bullship -- though its widely accepted, its widely wrong too. Its simply not an accurate charaterization.
First, no one is taxing that money again. No one taxes the principle, the money used. There is only a tax on the income from it.
Just like no one is taxing the money I used for my education again -- just the money I make from having it.
Where do you think I got the money for my education or my business, from Santa Clause? From Montana? I got it from a variety of places, just like the investor did.
And its complete hype any idea that all these big investors had a "real job" someplace, put money away, and used that to invest. But even if they did that -- its still not any different than others who get a real job , put money away, and use that to invest in their own business.
And investors will put their money where it will reap the most rewards. If they don't want
to make money and pay taxes on that, like I pay taxes on my investments, then they can open and run a businesss themselves, If they think I have such a great tax deal - come on in.
Let the market work, trust the market, not bs from tax lobbyist. Just tax all income types the same. Keep it simple.
Keep lobbyist and con artist like Boortz and Linder out of it.
But most tax cons -- like Steve Forbes a few years ago, and Dick Armey, and Newt Gingrich, are out and out deceptions to fool one group, and enrich another. And thats fine, thats politics, its the give and take of power.
Fairtax is kind of unique in that it was never meant to pass, much less to favor one group over another. Its not meant to enrich one group over another -- because they have little intention of passing it.
I would take Fairtax over Forbes BS flat tax, or Armey BS postcard return, or Gringrich BS to tax on investment.
Fairtax would be so bad so quick, and such a fiasco, that we would quickly repeal it, and maybe put in something that actually worked. We would know which politicans are full of ship -- and which we can depend on.
SO pick someone out. Pick out a self employed person, a day trader, a farmer, a teacher, a cop, a factory worker, a small business owner, and write the tax laws for him. Then give everyone else the same deal.
If you make the farmer pay FICA on the first 95K -- fine. Everyone pays FICA on the first 95K. If you have a progressive tax rate, fine,everyone has that same progression.
Fairtax sounded like it might be somewhat like that -- but sadly it wasnt. It took 30% off the gross income of wage earners only. No one else. Even business owners, self employed, didn't have their gross income cut 30%.
Neal Boortz didnt have his gross income from radio contracts cut 30%.
Tax codes are open to unlimited trickery and deception. Some of the deception is planned, its by con artist, for con artist.
But some of the trickery is just by people who buy into BS cliches, like Fairtax was, a gimmick some people really believed.
Tax it all the same. Keep it simple. Anytime you make it complicated, you are inviting BS and deception like FT was.
Bi-polar?
You are all over the place, there is no consistency to your message.
Income should not be taxed! When it passed it was a convenience to the gummint that employers had bookkeepers. Many workers were illiterate and more were innumerate.
The fairness in the FairTax as you noticed: "To divide a candy bar, allow one child to do the division, and the other child to make the first choice." Will invariably produce fair results.
The FairTax says: Make as much as you want or can, spend or save as you desire, pay taxes on what you spend, save what you will without penalty, and allow it to grow tax free, until you spend it.
You're hung-up on the moment of transition. All of your arguments focus on the little bit of extra math that allows buyer & seller to transition from one tax system into the next.
Businesses conduct inventories for audit every year, it's a big hassle, it disrupts workers schedules, it creates sales nightmares, sometimes companies even shut down for a few days... why? So they can report their basis for income taxation. Fooey!
When income isn't taxed no one will care how many widgets are on the shelf. You see a good deal, you but 3 years worth. Can't do that today, because you gotta pay taxes on the retained earnings.
Under FairTax, you sell it to the consumer, you collect the tax one time. That's it, accounting burden satisfied. Efficiency goes up, prices go down, economy of scale, competition.
Business decisions get made on merit, not tax consequences.
Consistance this question.
Fairtax claims all kind of simple truths, all kinds of fairness and efficiencies.
Hardly. What is fair or simple about forcing one family to have a federal tax liablity of 100,000 dollars, while the family next door, with the exact same income and spending, except one family has a child with cancer and chooses to spend to keep that child alive?
Linder and Boortz tried to answer that question on Hannity. They kept saying "well they pay that now, they pay that now'
No, they don't. They don't now pay 50 times as much federal taxes as their neighbor.
Fairtax supposedly treats everyone alike? Oh really? Then why put a sales tax on rent, when people who own their own home, or live with others, don't pay a sales tax on their living quarters?
By what logic should renters pay a sales tax? By what logic should working poor people pay sales tax on their medical expenses?
YOu can't cite the logic. Because there is none.
A tax code is about who pays, and how much. There has to be some reason one person has to pay far higher taxes than another. And I don't think having a child with cancer, can logically, or fairly, be the reason.
Mark,
Please take a moment to review the posts you make on this forum. I'm not talking about a simple typo, but the neurotic rantings.
[quote]
Consistance this question.
Fairtax claims all kind of simple truths, all kinds of fairness and efficiencies.
Hardly. What is fair or simple about forcing one family to have a federal tax liablity of 100,000 dollars, while the family next door, with the exact same income and spending, except one family has a child with cancer and chooses to spend to keep that child alive?
[/quote]
Try to compose a cogent thought before you post... perhaps you could edit off-line then paste.
So what part of the embedded tax out of the current $400k medical expense has escaped your willful blindness?
Could it have been the FICA & Soc. Sec. the hospital withholds for it's workers?
Could it have been in the $20,000 per week chemotherapy regiments?
Maybe it was on the $15,000 Hill-Rom adjustable hospital bed?
How about the $200/meal hospital food service cuisine?
Are you getting this? All these items, as inflated in price as they are, contain *huge* embedded tax liabilities. Because wherever that $$$ goes someone is paying tax on it.
Oh, wait a minute! The government is paying tax on Medicare or Medicaid benefits... That'll short-circuit your mind. How can the gummint fund itself with tax payments?
Take a minute and try to figure this out...
Ready?
Are you beginning to understand why sane people call you a crackpot and a raving lunatic?
Once more, I ask that you try to apply a little rational thought to the whole process. Maybe a $25 Vallium will help; oh, wait, Vallium really cost $0.02 and that's mine.
Post a Comment