True, it was not his plan. But the fact that it cost $22 million doesn't mean it's right either. Hmm, ok. The feeling is that the tax, no matter how small, is too much for those with limited incomes. My dad feels that he has never been given an equal shot at the ring and that now in his later years he not only shouldn't pay taxes but should be given more money to live on as that's what was promised when he started working oh so many years ago. I asked him, and several other men, what they thought should be a fair check from the government. The replies are frightening. Those conversations always start out with the fact that they have been paying into this social security system all their working lives and that their money is due them. They honestly feel that they have been cheated and that the government is not honoring the obligation to take care of them now that they are at the retirement age. I'll spare you the many conversations that we've had about them not saving or investing suffice to say that many of them will NOW say they should have. They say that as seniors, they shouldn't be expected to pay ANY taxes on (or with) their limited incomes. They feel that they are that special interest group (Seniors) that should always be the exception to the tax rule. He and his pals believe that health care should be free for anyone (and actually everyone) over 65, no matter what the need. When you ask how do they expect this stuff to be paid for there's always the resounding, "That ain't our problem. We were promised!" The consensus is that the government should be sending them about two or three grand a month for starters. Oh, that's in additon to his current pension. Pop put in over thirty years at Oscar Mayer (finished as a plant manager) before they closed up the Chicago plant. So they don't care to buy into the Fair Tax plan. I told Mr. Boortz that I would spend extensive time reading for content and while I thought that the plan accounted for a good times scenario it was woefully short if the economy went south while spending and politics went north. I'll be hooking up with him mid to late March to discuss the things a bit more. My community has a poor record on saving and/or investing. Our overall trust in that avenue leaves a lot to be desired. And until we stop the consumin' and start the savin' and stop with the mistrust, we'll be slippin' (further) into darkness.
Because we try to be a fair society. In the world you are proposing a poor man having a heart attack wouldn't get emergency service or be allowed on federal park land, etc.. I'm guessing you wouldn't want that, well neither do most of us. So the money to pay for services has to come from somewhere. The poor have no money, the middle class are under a heavy tax burden and considering inflation their disposable income is getting smaller. Who's left? Who is benefiting the most from our wealth. Yes the wealthy. "As Willie Sutton the bank robber said when asked why he robbed banks, 'because that's where the money is'." As long as we are building bridges to no where, sending billions in foreign aid across the world, having our military stationed all around the world permanently the tax problem will not change. There is no tax collection system that will spare the rich and still leave enough to pay what congress spends. The rest of us just don't make enough money to pay all the bills. Cutting spending is the only way to solve the problem. Then any tax collection system would work better, even the one we have now. Most higher income and wealthy people own a business, there are many ways to shelter or defer income with business structures so the actual tax rate many wealthy are paying is actually less than you might think. In most cases the working man doesn't have these options.
Liberal = Income redistribution.....need I say more. But thats for another thread. Google John Linder (R-Georgia) and HR 25. Its available right now with companion legislation, the repeal of the 16th ammendment. It can be done. Is it a long shot, sure? Government hates to give up power and thats exactly what they'd be doing. Transfer of power to the people. But, if you and others just want to throw up your hands and say it can't be done, well then I guess it won't get done. My rep is John Linder. If I had someone else, I'd be sending emails telling them they'd better get behind this legislation or forget my vote.
Who said the wealthy would be paying a pittance in tax. Where do you guys get these ideas from? Generally speaking, the more a person makes, the more they spend, therefore the more tax they would pay. What so hard to understand about that? Do you think a guy that makes $10 mil/yr is going to spend about the same as someone making $50k/yr? So you think we need to keep this insane tax code that we have now? Jeez, I don't know what to say about that. Are you an accountant?
Wasn't liberal thinking responsible for founding America while the conservative thinking was to stay a subject of England? I've sent emails and in the past written letters to my congress men/woman. I don't think our congressmen think much of us voters except at election time.
Right and you see where we're at now. A very nice aspect of the FairTax is the difficulty Congress would have raising federal taxes on us in the future. Its not so easy to increase that simple and easily seen 23% sales tax when EVERYBODY has to pay it. Plus it would require a super majority vote.
Under the fair tax, everyone will pay taxes -- even the one's that get prebates. The poor are not going to get off scottfree. and revenues will be plentiful....