OT Get ready America

Spam Man <[email hidden]> wrote:
|| Get ready Americans for the biggest screwing in all history.
|| For some time I have worried that the consumption tax
|| (national sales tax) to replace our income tax idea would
|| take hold. This would be a nightmare for low and middle
|| income people. There is more and more talk every day for
|| this. Now that old geezer Greenspan is saying it is a good
|| idea. He adds that maybe we should also keep the income tax
|| and have both. Since the consumption tax would be a rich
|| man's dream, that is probably what we will end up with. With
|| a consumption tax, the low and middle income earners would
|| pay all of the tax and the rich man would pay even less.
|| Americans had better start raising hell with their
|| congressmen and senators now to stop this before it gains
|| anymore momentum. The only fair income tax replacement would
|| be a flat tax with the standard deduction and the family
|| member exemptions and no other deductions or loopholes.
|| Please help spread the word.

You are not very intelligent, Are you?

BJ in Texas said:

Spam Man <[email hidden]> wrote:
|| Get ready Americans for the biggest screwing in all history.
|| For some time I have worried that the consumption tax
|| (national sales tax) to replace our income tax idea would
|| take hold. This would be a nightmare for low and middle
|| income people. There is more and more talk every day for
|| this. Now that old geezer Greenspan is saying it is a good
|| idea. He adds that maybe we should also keep the income tax
|| and have both. Since the consumption tax would be a rich
|| man's dream, that is probably what we will end up with. With
|| a consumption tax, the low and middle income earners would
|| pay all of the tax and the rich man would pay even less.
|| Americans had better start raising hell with their
|| congressmen and senators now to stop this before it gains
|| anymore momentum. The only fair income tax replacement would
|| be a flat tax with the standard deduction and the family
|| member exemptions and no other deductions or loopholes.
|| Please help spread the word.

"BJ in Texas" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
.. The only fair income tax replacement would
| || be a flat tax with the standard deduction and the family
| || member exemptions and no other deductions or loopholes.

LMAO! The hypocricy of this cracks me up!

Someone with a family says that the only fair income tax would be one that
offers deductions to family members -- but no other deductions or
loopholes. I am single. How is that fair to me that you should get
deductions for choosing to procreate. Why should I pay for your children's
schooling, busses, healthcare, etc., while you get a self-proclaimed tax
deduction? You want a flat tax, but want to add a loophole that would
benefit yourself over others. (Have you read "Animal Farm" lately?)

The ONLY truly fair tax is a consumption tax where we would pay tax on what
we buy, not on what we earn. It will fairly distribute the tax burden.
Those who are affluent and buy big ticket items will pay a proportionately
higher tax; those who are poor and can buy only inexpensive items anyway
will pay less tax. Very fair. The only ones who don't like it are the ones
who have all the tax loopholes now, like the whopping deductions for
breeding.

The consumption tax is a universal, bipartisan idea because it's such a good
one. It was originally proposed by the ultra-liberal Gov. Jerry Brown when
he ran for president several years ago, and they laughed him out of
contention. Now the ultra-conservative Republicans right is proposing the
exact same thing. I would imagine some people would not like the idea
specifically because it is not a political issue, just a plain good idea.
They'd have nothing to b*tch about if both parties want the same thing .

Peter

Tax Man said:

Get ready Americans for the biggest screwing in all history. For some

Quoted message said:

time I have worried that the consumption tax (national sales tax) to
replace our income tax idea would take hold.

SNIP...

Quoted message said:

Please help spread the word.

Great low carb advice...

Coff
325/287/185

Another creature that doesn't know what OT means.

coff said:

Tax Man said:

Get ready Americans for the biggest screwing in all history. For some

Quoted message said:

time I have worried that the consumption tax (national sales tax) to
replace our income tax idea would take hold.

SNIP...

Quoted message said:

Please help spread the word.

Great low carb advice...

Coff
325/287/185

"Tax Man" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
: Another creature that doesn't know what OT means.
:
:
You're boring.

Another creature who doesn't know what "alt.support.diet.low-carb"
means...

Coff
325/287/185

Tax Man said:

Get ready Americans for the biggest screwing in all history. For some

Quoted message said:

time I have worried that the consumption tax (national sales tax) to
replace our income tax idea would take hold. This would be a

nightmare

Quoted message said:

for low and middle income people.

Read this before you continue bs'ing people. Under this plan, "poor"
people would not only survive, they'd probably thrive and the benefits
for the rest of us would be not too shabby either.
also,maybe you should research how much the "rich" pay in federal
income taxes.
You'd be embarrassed by your ignorance.

http://www.fairtax.org/

Quoted message said:

Tax Man said:

Get ready Americans for the biggest screwing in all history. For some

Quoted message said:

time I have worried that the consumption tax (national sales tax) to
replace our income tax idea would take hold. This would be a

nightmare

Quoted message said:

for low and middle income people.

Read this before you continue bs'ing people. Under this plan, "poor"
people would not only survive, they'd probably thrive and the benefits
for the rest of us would be not too shabby either.
also,maybe you should research how much the "rich" pay in federal
income taxes.
You'd be embarrassed by your ignorance.

http://www.fairtax.org/

How will it affect a neighbor of mine? He is 65. He worked at least 45
years and always paid his taxes. He is now retired on social security
and a small pension. When he files his taxes now, he ends up with zero
taxes. He doesn't travel and like to stay at home and do things like
plant a garden and live a simple life. If he had to start paying 25% or
even 10% of his income on a consumption tax, even his simple way of life
would be in jeopardy.

Cat Man said:

Quoted message said:

Tax Man said:

Get ready Americans for the biggest screwing in all history. For some

Quoted message said:

time I have worried that the consumption tax (national sales tax) to
replace our income tax idea would take hold. This would be a

nightmare

Quoted message said:

for low and middle income people.

Read this before you continue bs'ing people. Under this plan, "poor"
people would not only survive, they'd probably thrive and the benefits
for the rest of us would be not too shabby either.
also,maybe you should research how much the "rich" pay in federal
income taxes.
You'd be embarrassed by your ignorance.
http://www.fairtax.org/

How will it affect a neighbor of mine? He is 65. He worked at least 45
years and always paid his taxes. He is now retired on social security
and a small pension. When he files his taxes now, he ends up with zero
taxes. He doesn't travel and like to stay at home and do things like
plant a garden and live a simple life. If he had to start paying 25% or
even 10% of his income on a consumption tax, even his simple way of life
would be in jeopardy.

If he doesn't travel and doesn't buy things, how would he be affected by a
tax on purchases? That simply does not make sense.

--
Bob M
remove ".x" to reply

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.fairtax.org/

How will it affect a neighbor of mine? He is 65. He worked at least

45

Quoted message said:

years and always paid his taxes. He is now retired on social security

Quoted message said:

and a small pension. When he files his taxes now, he ends up with

zero

Quoted message said:

taxes. He doesn't travel and like to stay at home and do things like
plant a garden and live a simple life. If he had to start paying 25%

or

Quoted message said:

even 10% of his income on a consumption tax, even his simple way of

life

Quoted message said:

would be in jeopardy.

Read some of these answers to frequently asked questions

http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/smart/faq.html

Bob M said:

Cat Man said:

Quoted message said:

Tax Man wrote:

> Get ready Americans for the biggest screwing in all history. For some

> time I have worried that the consumption tax (national sales tax) to
> replace our income tax idea would take hold. This would be a

nightmare

> for low and middle income people.

Read this before you continue bs'ing people. Under this plan, "poor"
people would not only survive, they'd probably thrive and the benefits
for the rest of us would be not too shabby either.
also,maybe you should research how much the "rich" pay in federal
income taxes.
You'd be embarrassed by your ignorance.
http://www.fairtax.org/

How will it affect a neighbor of mine? He is 65. He worked at least
45 years and always paid his taxes. He is now retired on social
security and a small pension. When he files his taxes now, he ends up
with zero taxes. He doesn't travel and like to stay at home and do
things like plant a garden and live a simple life. If he had to start
paying 25% or even 10% of his income on a consumption tax, even his
simple way of life would be in jeopardy.

If he doesn't travel and doesn't buy things, how would he be affected by
a tax on purchases? That simply does not make sense.

He does spend his money. It doesn't take much effort to spend a few
hundred dollars. With the extra tax he would be able to buy even less.

Quoted message said:

Those coming up with horror scenarios for a consumption based tax
ignore some obvious and very simple fixes that could be used to greatly
lessen the impact on those with low income. Those fixes would be to
exempt food, clothing, and shelter from the tax. That is what is
already done with sales taxes in many states. All food and clothing
purchases could be exempt and homes/rent up to a certain limit as well.

Quoted message said:

Those coming up with horror scenarios for a consumption based tax
ignore some obvious and very simple fixes that could be used to greatly
lessen the impact on those with low income. Those fixes would be to
exempt food, clothing, and shelter from the tax. That is what is
already done with sales taxes in many states. All food and clothing
purchases could be exempt and homes/rent up to a certain limit as well.

the thing with not taxing food and clothing though, is that you'll have to set
up a list of taxable foods and taxable clothing. for example you wouldn't want
to tax a potato but you'd definitely want to tax caviar. you probably won't
want to tax baby/kids clothes in general but how about baby/kids clothes made by
Chanel? that means a (large?) bunch of govt employees would be hire to make
those decisions. e.g. in UK, chocolate is taxed, biscuits and cakes are not
taxed, but biscuits coated with chocolate are taxed. As for me, I am neither
for or against consumption tax, just wanting to point out an interesting point.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Those coming up with horror scenarios for a consumption based tax
ignore some obvious and very simple fixes

Those in favor of a consumption tax ignore the very significant
negatives......Canada and Western Europe both use "consumption" taxes
heavily and routinely have unemployment rates several points higher(often
nearly double) than our largely income (ability to pay) based taxation.
Since consumption and the resulting production fuels our standard of living
attempting to discourage the very strength of our system defies logic. As a
side note people in Washington state with a approx.8% sales tax keep new
cars 18 months longer than states without a sales tax.....not inherently bad
mind you but repair shops do a banner business per capita while
manufacturers and dealerships do not. The public gets the pleasure of being
stranded, tow trucks and serious repair bills with a net loss of productive
jobs and serious quality of life impacts.
With inflation and interest rates being relatively low this past
decade...after witnessing the 90's boom and eventual bust, with many very
foolish ill fated investments. The 90's stock market hysteria and subsequent
crash and the current ever escalating housing market.... there is no sound
evidence that our "saving rate" is too low for overall optimum economic
growth...taxes designed to quell consumption are more than foolish but
downright economically harmful....... Soggy

X-No-Archive: yes

Rod & Betty Jo said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Those coming up with horror scenarios for a consumption based tax
ignore some obvious and very simple fixes

Those in favor of a consumption tax ignore the very significant
negatives......Canada and Western Europe both use "consumption" taxes
heavily and routinely have unemployment rates several points higher(often
nearly double) than our largely income (ability to pay) based taxation.
Since consumption and the resulting production fuels our standard of living
attempting to discourage the very strength of our system defies logic. As a
side note people in Washington state with a approx.8% sales tax keep new
cars 18 months longer than states without a sales tax.....not inherently bad
mind you but repair shops do a banner business per capita while
manufacturers and dealerships do not. The public gets the pleasure of being
stranded, tow trucks and serious repair bills with a net loss of productive
jobs and serious quality of life impacts.
With inflation and interest rates being relatively low this past
decade...after witnessing the 90's boom and eventual bust, with many very
foolish ill fated investments. The 90's stock market hysteria and subsequent
crash and the current ever escalating housing market.... there is no sound
evidence that our "saving rate" is too low for overall optimum economic
growth...taxes designed to quell consumption are more than foolish but
downright economically harmful....... Soggy

come on!! either way it's a tax. consumption tax, income tax, are both
taxes! your argument says that consumption tax is more lethal on reducing
consumers' expenditure than income tax is plainly wrong.

the latest unemployment rates in US is 5.2% and the EU25 is 8.8% (pulled from
Eurostat's website). this isn't a lot considering the labor market rigidities
in Europe. to think about differences in unemployment rates in Europe and US
you have to think along the line on why European employers are more reluctant to
hire and why workers are slower to find jobs. e.g. union coverage (as in how
many employees are covered by centralised bargaining) is higher in all European
countries, employment protection is stricter in Europe, geographical mobility is
lower in Europe, there are language barriers between countries in Europe,
unemployment benefits are more generous in Europe, etc.

your argument about the Washington 8% sales tax is also wrong. if anything the
sales tax would keep more Americans in employment than if the tax rate is 0%.
why? almost all repairs are performed within US, new cars can be imported.
simple as that.

and the saving rate in US *is* too low. need evidence? look at the dual
deficits. look at the free falling dollar. no one goes into red by saving too
much. I can go on to point out why you've misunderstood the definition of
investment (it's not buying stocks in the market, it's not buying a house unless
you're buying a newly built house, however spending time to learn more about the
world around you IS an investment), and why low savings mean low investment and
slower growth but I have already spent far too much time on this post. Go to
the http://www.nobel.se/ and read about the growth model developed by Robert
Solow in 1960 and you would understand.

"the thing with not taxing food and clothing though, is that you'll
have to set
up a list of taxable foods and taxable clothing. for example you
wouldn't want
to tax a potato but you'd definitely want to tax caviar. you probably
won't
want to tax baby/kids clothes in general but how about baby/kids
clothes made by
Chanel? that means a (large?) bunch of govt employees would be hire to
make
those decisions. e.g. in UK, chocolate is taxed, biscuits and cakes
are not
taxed, but biscuits coated with chocolate are taxed. As for me, I am
neither
for or against consumption tax, just wanting to point out an
interesting point. "

The simplest solution would be to just exempt all food and clothing,
which as I pointed out, is
exactly what many states already do with sales tax. It wouldn't bother
me one bit if those that
choose to eat caviar can do so without paying tax on it. Those folks
will be paying plenty of tax
on most everything else they consume and that is far preferable to
having a complicated system with
govt employees deciding what gets taxed and what doesn't. As for
housing, you could easily put a
dollar limit exemption on that, where any purchase under that amount is
exempt.

"come on!! either way it's a tax. consumption tax, income tax, are
both
taxes! your argument says that consumption tax is more lethal on
reducing
consumers' expenditure than income tax is plainly wrong. "

I tend to agree. One thing for sure, attributing the differences in
unemployment rates between
Europe and the US mainly to income vs consumption tax is just crazy.