Quote:
Originally Posted by liberty1776
The hypothetical things I said are no more hypothetical than the implicit assumption made by FairTaxers that politicians will remain honest under that FairTax. The only difference is that experience indicates that I am correct and the FairTaxers are wrong: politicians usually engage in trickery. Why this would be different with the FairTax is beyond me.
I know that the FairTax reomoves withholding. But, once employees are netting more money, competition will take effect and the price of labor will decrease. This is how competition affects every market. There is no reason that labor is any different. So, after the FairTax goods will cost the same amount of money, and people will be netting the same amount of money that they currently net. So, at best, this makes the plan a wash. Then we have the other things I mentioned to consider and it becomes clear to me that the FairTax is not a great idea.
My ideal tax system is a system in which no one is taxed. The upshot of this, is, of course an anrachic system. I have discussed this on another thread, and I don't think a discussion of it here is approproate.
Changing the tax system misses the point. The point is that taxation is unjust. The FairTax taxes people more than the income tax, so it is worse than the income tax. The real problem is spending, not taxation.
I have to go, I will expand this post if you want me to do so.
|
While the possible changes to the bill as written is a valid argument, not knowing what those changes are going to be makes it difficult to argue them. When congress has a serious debate on the Fair Tax, then I can argue against it. Till then, its futile. I can only support the bill as it is proposed.
Beyond that, my ideal system is actually a flat fee system. But you have to have some kind of tax. How else do you pay for the common defense? I dont think taxation is unjust as long as it applied fairly and simply, and you have a chocie in whether to pay it.