You don't even know a free market. Reinstate the constitution, by force.

"A national sales tax would have to be like 30%, you know, on top of any state taxes. It would also have to be applied to everything. And it would kick off a black market which would be cool I admit, but the government would have to crack down on it which would suck. Try buying a house with taxes like that."

Based on the President's proposed budget and the GDP it would have to be a 20%tax.

I would rather be able to determine when i have to pay that much tax (we are paying it anyway) as a consumer, rather than having it taken from me with out me being able to have any say in the matter (to me this is criminal).

"I don't follow. Terrorists blow stuff up, or at least advocate doing so."

This was the explanation provided for the assault on the protesters at the conventions, that's a very narrow definition of terrorist.




They're getting better as far as pollution. Santiago used to have dozens of bus routes and companies, and now they're all being merged together and with the subway system. Interestingly, Chile is one of the least corrupt countries in Latin America, which is admittedly not saying much, but on a global ranking they were only two behind the US in 2007.

I can't wait till I have the means to travel (not to far off I hope). Who knows I may find a place I don't want to leave. I am slightly infatuated with living in SA at some point, so much to be learned and seen.

Based on the President's proposed budget and the GDP it would have to be a 20%tax.

I would rather be able to determine when i have to pay that much tax (we are paying it anyway) as a consumer, rather than having it taken from me with out me being able to have any say in the matter (to me this is criminal).

Click to expand...

That's kind of the problem. If you could determine when you paid taxes, you would probably pay less of them, the government would make less money, and then would have to raise taxes to pay for things.

I read the Cliff notes (figuratively) of the "Fair Tax" plan, and even though they claim it's 23%, they use creative math to calculate that figure. Assume something costs a dollar. The "Fair Tax" would add 30 cents onto its price. 30% tax right? Nope, say the "Fair Tax" people, that's only a 23% tax, since the tax is 23% of the total cost, which is $1.30. But it's dishonest, since we're used to thinking of sales tax calculated the old fashioned way.

This was the explanation provided for the assault on the protesters at the conventions, that's a very narrow definition of terrorist.

Click to expand...

I don't recall hearing about that, which is what prompted my question. The DNC and RNC have the right to keep protesters out of the convention area, after all they are private events. They typically have rules regarding how close protesters can get. People definitely see them, but are still able to attend the events. Who called them terrorists anyway?

I can't wait till I have the means to travel (not to far off I hope). Who knows I may find a place I don't want to leave. I am slightly infatuated with living in SA at some point, so much to be learned and seen.

Click to expand...

SA = South America I assume? Yeah, I'd like to move down there for a couple years at some point. I was in Chile for a month, about a year and a half ago, and I didn't want to come back. They're so laid back and friendly down there, it's great. They almost remind you of a bunch of stoners, but they're like that all the time.

Not dishonest, just a matter of being creative with how they calculate it.

Of course, assuming that their figures are correct regarding the current taxes on a $100 dollar item (22%) and that the item will drop down to $78 once those taxes are removed. The 23% inclusive only raises it to $101.30 - $101.40.

$78 * 130% = $101.40.

Hardly a horrible increase, and it also serves to encourage savings.

As far as the government jacking up the rates. If its a sales tax then it becomes counter productive for the government to raise the rates, because all that would accomplish would be to motivate people to find ways around it (less purchasing, black market purchases).

Though since our economy is based on large scale consumerism it is debatable whether or not the NRST would be a good idea...

"That's kind of the problem. If you could determine when you paid taxes, you would probably pay less of them, the government would make less money, and then would have to raise taxes to pay for things."

Hell yeah they would get less of my money and I would be able to determine how much I contribute through how much I consume. Tax internet transactions the same as in person/in state transactions, its kinda like a black market right, people selling shit on ebay,etc and not reporting it, that should increase the tax base and encourage local purchases= more local jobs. I think you would see some what of a local producer/consumer movement and that should be encouraged. We already have a tremendous amount of "black market" spending going on, do you really think it would make that big of a difference. We are lazy people why try to hunt stuff down when u know wally world has it and what isle it is on.

Producers still have to pay tax on what they purchase to create a product. I can see where large scale producers would lower costs by producing their own raw materials and laterally transfer between divisions of the company, again prob not a bad thing it would cut the cost to the consumer and encourage buying cheap american goods instead of cheap chinese goods. Oh, tax incoming goods the same as if they had been produced in the US, that ought to increase tax revenue and even the playing field for US companies operating and employing at home.

I would agree that rising taxes would be counter productive. You are absolutly correct that it could cut gov spending (if they actually followed a balanced budget) and that is Fing spectacular. The people would be more adament about decreased oversees spending, which is causing many of our problems, and an cleansing of the in Nation spending

Oh, the physical assualt on the protesters was explained to CNN as being neccessary for national security or antiterrorism measures (sorry I don't remember the exact qoute, prob worth a quick google if you missed it). The same shit could be said for marching on DC.

The inherent assumption is that lowering taxes by a certain amount will lower prices across the board by the same amount. Obviously not true. My dad is a farmer. Like other farmers, he writes off so many expenses that he pays next to nothing in income tax. So federal tax makes up maybe 1% of the total amount of money he spends. Now let's say that sales taxes were used instead. Since he has a ton of expenses, he now has to pay a much larger amount of money as tax, and food prices go up accordingly.

Income tax hurts the economy the least, which is one of the main reasons the federal government relies on it so heavily.

Doctor Pot said:

The inherent assumption is that lowering taxes by a certain amount will lower prices across the board by the same amount. Obviously not true. My dad is a farmer. Like other farmers, he writes off so many expenses that he pays next to nothing in income tax. So federal tax makes up maybe 1% of the total amount of money he spends. Now let's say that sales taxes were used instead. Since he has a ton of expenses, he now has to pay a much larger amount of money as tax, and food prices go up accordingly.

Income tax hurts the economy the least, which is one of the main reasons the federal government relies on it so heavily.

Click to expand...

I think the greatest benefit is that it gets the government out from behind our backs and out of the shadows and puts it where we can see it. It is kind of hard to appreciate the true cost of our bloated government when for the most part we are ignorant about the true costs of our bloated government.

TheBrutalTruth said:

I think the greatest benefit is that it gets the government out from behind our backs and out of the shadows and puts it where we can see it. It is kind of hard to appreciate the true cost of our bloated government when for the most part we are ignorant about the true costs of our bloated government.

Click to expand...

That's not much of a benefit. Instead of having the government off doing its own thing, it's now an ever-present annoyance in our lives, and hurting the economy to boot. Rather than being pissed off by taxes once a year, now it's every day! Sometimes we'd rather just not be pissed off.

homer - They still haven't gotten rid of illegal file sharing. What would stop "illegal" auction sites? Every one of your other purported benefits is wishful thinking. The IRS would go from being a bureau in Washington that collects taxes once a year to being a huge omnipresent entity that monitors every monetary transaction that occurs in the country. Kind of a strange position, considering I'm assuming you're a small government type.

Flat sales tax hurts the less wealthy, who have no choice but to spend most of their money. Rich folks would just buy stuff in other countries to avoid the sales tax. The poor and middle-class would not be able to do that very easily, and mostly not at all, so their taxes would comprise the bulk of all taxes. The rich would pay very little. And our bills would be the same. Soooo....the poor and middle-class would have to make up that difference, by making the sales tax higher, providing even MORE incentive for the rich to spend/invest their money elsewhere. And so on. If you want to give wealthy folks a free ride, a flat sales tax is one way to accomplish the goal.

The IRS would go from being a bureau in Washington that collects taxes once a year to being a huge omnipresent entity that monitors every monetary transaction that occurs in the country. Kind of a strange position, considering I'm assuming you're a small government type.


Why would you assume that I propose to give them that much power?

If there were a national sales tax, the IRS would have to keep tabs on every monetary transaction in the country. Plus, in order to figure out what everyone's "prebate" would be, they'd need to keep track of everyone's income as well. Plus, a lot of poor people probably move around a lot and may not keep their addresses updated and thus wouldn't get their "prebates" anyway.

Throw in the fact that this "Fair Tax" isn't fair at all and is extremely regressive and would hurt the economy, and I'm having a hard time seeing how anyone would think it's a great idea.