this is not a tax

it is an investment in the old and handicapped



you do know that the old are supposed to file tax returns on their social security right

“and when you get through adding all of the taxes in this country it is 50-75% depending on where you live”


That is not TRUE. The National Sales tax would NOT replace state or local taxes and you can not come even close to 50% with ALL Federal taxes including Payroll taxes. Since when can only one person comment on a post? My answers however are correct. No one could evaluate the impact of them without knowing the rate and on what would the tax be applied. For example would the tax be applied to Goods or would it be applied to Goods and SERVICES? Would there be any exemptions such as food, medicine and clothing? Would foreign visitors have to pay this sales tax? If YES that would END tourism in the U.S.!

As I said it would not help the low income and the retired as I stated. It does not address the "Ability to Pay” which I guess the wealthy do not care about!!!!! It would also need to produce enough added revenue to BALANCE the Federal Budget and repay the over $9 Trillion of debt as well as fix Medicare and Social Security.

“you do know that the old are supposed to file tax returns on their social security right”


85% of SS benefits are taxed as income tax if you income is above a certain level. For many retired they pay NO federal income tax on their SS benefits. Under the sales tax plan they would ALL pay and the amount could make their retirement impossible. Again the "Ability to pay" is not addressed by a Sales Tax!!!!!!!

1 it would be a national and a state sales tax



2 this is not a tax



goods

that would depend on the state but federal on food and medicine yes



[
first of all your not worried about the debt or you would vote out all of those people spending money on pork



why they pay sales tax now


and again who do you think pays all of the taxes in this country now it isn't drengenal he passes it on to his custermers

which are the poor and middle class



and again where is your fix for medicare and social security

i know it is raise taxes on the rich and then the rich can pass it down to the poor and the middle class


but remember if taxes go up by 5% prices will go up by at least 8% to pay for the extra taxes on the new income ie inflation


so go right ahead and raise taxes on the rich


that is what is making the gape between the rich and the poor bigger

it isn't the guy who owns the house that pays property tax it is the guy that rents it

"1 it would be a national and a state sales tax”

NOT CORRECT. There is NO proposal to replace local and state taxes with a sales tax. For one thing they vary to such a great extent such a tax would not be possible!

"that would depend on the state but federal on food and medicine yes"

That would destroy the low income and most retired Americans!


"why they pay sales tax now "

NOT 36%


"and again who do you think pays all of the taxes in this country now it isn't drengenal he passes it on to his customers

which are the poor and middle class "



DREAM ON. All it would do is increase the profits of corporations!


"so go right ahead and raise taxes on the rich "

Increasing federal income taxes on the rich will just reduce the size of their surplus. We had the higher tax rates during the 1990's and there was NO adverse impact on the economy. The 1990's were the best period in modern history for America.

1 it would be a national and a state sales tax

You're wrong right there. It's "national" ONLY!

"why they pay sales tax now " NOT 36%

col I don't know where you came up with this figure, but if you're using it to describe the "national tax" then you're wrong also. The "correct" figure is 23%.

You're wrong right there. It's "national" ONLY! That is what I said. It will NOT replace any local and state taxes. That is why to say that it will replace taxes between 50-70% is just NOT CORRECT>

col I don't know where you came up with this figure, but if you're using it to describe the "national tax" then you're wrong also. The "correct" figure is 23%. This is where the % came from.

Reply By: danielost
Posted: Sunday, April 29, 2007
COL Gene


that question was aimed at drengenil not someone who wouldn't know the truth if it bit them

and when you get through adding all of the taxes in this country it is 50-75% depending on where you live

my sales tax idea would be 36%


The issue is that no one can determine what the impact would be on them without knowing on what things would it be applied. GOODS or GOODS and SERVICES. Would there be some things exempted. However in general the low income and retired would not do well with this type of tax. I am also not sure how this would generate enough revenue to balance the budget, provide the added funding needed for Social Security and Medicare. My guess it would not produce enough to do the job. This is an idea that WILL not become reality in our life time! It seems to have support among the upper income conservatives. Thus I believe they think it will lower their total taxes which will mean the middle and low income taxpayers would be stuck making up the difference!

Reply By: danielost Posted: Sunday, April 29, 2007 COL Gene that question was aimed at drengenil not someone who wouldn't know the truth if it bit them and when you get through adding all of the taxes in this country it is 50-75% depending on where you live my sales tax idea would be 36% The issue is that no one can determine what the impact would be on them without knowing on what things would it be applied. GOODS or GOODS and SERVICES. Would there be some things exempted. However in general the low income and retired would not do well with this type of tax. I am also not sure how this would generate enough revenue to balance the budget, provide the added funding needed for Social Security and Medicare. My guess it would not produce enough to do the job. This is an idea that WILL not become reality in our life time! It seems to have support among the upper income conservatives. Thus I believe they think it will lower their total taxes which will mean the middle and low income taxpayers would be stuck making up the difference!

That may be but her is the ACTUAL proposal:

The FairTax is now before the U.S. Congress. The House version is HR 25 and the Senate version is S 1493. Listed below is a summary of the bill. Additionally, any national retail sales tax proposal will need to be accompanied by a proposal to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution. See: HJR 45 Official Summary The Fair Tax Act of 2003 amends the Internal Revenue Code to repeal subtitle A (Income Taxes), B (Estate and Gift Taxes), and C (Employment Taxes) of the Internal Revenue Code. Imposes a tax on the use or consumption in the United States of taxable property or services. Sets the tax rate at 23 percent for the calendar year 2005. Sets the rate, for years after 2005, at the combined sum of the general revenue rate (14.91 percent), the old-age survivors and disability rate, and the hospital insurance rate. Sets forth provisions concerning, among other things; (1) imports and exports; (2) definitions; (3) credits and refunds; (4) a "family consumption allowance"; (5) Federal and State cooperative tax administration; (6) administrative matters; (7) collections, appeals, and taxpayer rights; (8) special rules (hobbies, gaming, government purchases, non-profits, and etc.); (9) financial intermediation services; and (10) additional matters. Sets forth provisions concerning the: (1) phase-out of administration of repealed taxes; (2) administration of other taxes (establishes an Excise Tax Bureau and a Sales Tax Bureau); and (3) sales tax inclusive social security benefits indexation.

So then it was "danielost" that was talking out his butt. I'm sorry col for thinking it was you.

you don't count that recession that started in 1998 do you



i have never heard of this bill so no i wasn't talking out of my butt

i was giving you my thoughts col on the other hand is passing on info from someone else but won't or can't provide any links

so again i was giving my idea and i said that in my post read it again

i have never heard of this bill so no i wasn't talking out of my butt i was giving you my thoughts col on the other hand is passing on info from someone else but won't or can't provide any links so again i was giving my idea and i said that in my post read it again

You want a link? Here ya go.

Link

i don't want a link becouse i wasn't talking about that bill i was talking about an idea of mine

but then dems. and libs. don't want people to have thier own ideas

they just want them to repeat the party line

I DON'T BELONG TO A PARTY SO I CAN HAVE MY OWN IDEAS

i don't vote for a party i try to vote for the best person for the job

bush wasn't the best person for the job but he was less evil the kerry and gore was

if gore had been president on 9/11 we would now be under the rule of al quida directly or indirectly

ie our actions in the world would be dictated by them

“ou don't count that recession that started in 1998 do you”

That was at the END of the 1990's. How did we do so well all those years with the higher tax rates? We have always had Business Cycles. The downturn did not amount to much until 2001. Thus for MOST of the 1990's with the higher tax rates the economy was GREAT. The wealthy did outstanding and all the scare talk about the adverse impact of higher taxes on the wealthy is HOT AIR!

I will stand on what I have said the sales tax to replace most federal taxes WILL NOT BECOME LAW! It would harm low income and most retired. It does NOT address the ability to pay which is essential for a tax.

The impact of the Bush Tax Cuts is to concentrate more of the total wealth in the hands of the top 10% and it has worked!

I don't vote for a party I try to vote for the best person for the job. That is what I have done as well. Although I am a Republican I have voted for both republicans and democrats over the years. In 2000 I supported McCain and most likely would have voted for him had he won the nomination. When Bush won and I looked at his experience and positions, I knew he was NOT the right person to lead our country. I was CORRECT!

dispite




i would have voted for mccain over gore or kerry

anyone is better than a man who says he started the internet when the internet was started in the 50's by the military to keep communcations open no matter what

or who breaks the law and then as a defense says he didn't brake the law becouse he only collected $9

and you couldn't pin kerry down on anything everytime he opened his mouth something else came out on the same subject