Letters to the Web Editor

David Nelson · Joined: 12 May 2008 12:27 pm Posts: 27

Karen,
Nearly every sentence in that Bartlett hit piece has been discredited by objective economists. My personal opinion is that Bartlett is only the tip of the iceberg. When the wealthy that have conspired to make our tax code such a mess see that the FairTax has a shot at actually becoming law, they will come out in droves to protect their advantage. They may even go lower than to link the FairTax to the Church of Scientology�they may begin to call it "liberal".
It is a logical fallacy to oppose the migration to the FairTax because it doesn't raise billions more than the current code raises. It seems that you agree that the cause of the deficit is rampant overspending in Washington. That will not be fixed soley by the FairTax, but I believe when Americans begin to actually see how much is taken from them they will begin to question what they get for their money. In fact, I believe that the most vocal demographic for lowering spending will be the lowest rungs on the economic ladder. Try asking some friends how much they paid in taxes last year. I cannot tell you how many people answer that question with, "noting--I got money back." We don't "feel" the taxation now because part is taken before we ever see our checks and part is hidden in the cost of the goods we buy.

Even though they are compensated for it with the prebate, the visual reminder of the tax rate every time they spend will make Americans "feel" like they are paying a lot in and question the return on their investment.

karen gray · Joined: 12 May 2008 08:57 am Posts: 18

David,

Bruce Bartlett has been discredited by whom, exactly? The part I used intentionally was about the deceptiveness of the "inclusive" tax rate which is designed to make what you pay look smaller.

The essentials are these...

At every level, people will pay more. I just went to the so-called "Fairtax" website and calculated my little "prebate." According to the effective tax tables I presented earlier, I do much better under the current system. By the way, to calculate my "prebate," or monthly check from Uncle Sam under your sales tax, I need the kind of deduction information I have to gather now under the current system. So where is the savings in hassle? The IRS will still be needed, and I am paying more. The advantage is, what again?

This is becoming tiresome because facts and figures are countered by sweeping, unsubstantiated shibboleths, like, "once people see how much they are paying in taxes..." I showed you according to government figures exactly what they are paying. No one, I repeat, no one with any sense, from bottom to top, will pay less under your new system...no one.

Using reality, that is to say a tax exclusive method of figuring, if you are giving everyone in the bottom 80% back the same percentage of prebate I get, you are cutting your tax take by roughly 20%. That means the tax rate necessary to fund the budget at break even, discounting the off-budget war and not paying down a dime of the debt, is 30%. That does also not include what the government will spend paying itself the sales tax on everything it buys from paper clips to stealth bombers. That too, will go up 30%...and so on and so on.

Look guys, the current system is way too complicated. It could easily be simplified into a no-deductions, stairstep system retaining progressivity and keep the rate at each level as low as is practical. This is a chimera and once I saw the "prebate" calculator, just as records-intensive as the current system.

More in taxes, keep the IRS, and no less complication. Someone again tell me the advantages here?

Karen

Local Weather Forecast
Today: Current:76	Sunday: 92/70	Monday: 91/71
Complete Forecast for Sep 06 2008

ONLINE EXTRAS

SITE SERVICES

BIBLE VERSE

Letters to the Web Editor