The solution to all our Tax problems??

[The Truth]

So, if you spend all of your income, you get tax punished. If you invest, or save your income, you doge some taxation?


So, heavy consumers pick up the tax bill for the heavy savers.

Rich people save, middle/poor class spend all earnings.

So, middle class punished?

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]
So, if you spend all of your income, you get tax punished. If you invest, or save your income, you doge some taxation?


So, heavy consumers pick up the tax bill for the heavy savers.

Rich people save, middle/poor class spend all earnings.

So, middle class punished?

[/ QUOTE ]

*ding ding*

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
So, middle class punished?


[/ QUOTE ]
Just like every other government program [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FWIW, IMO the "Fair Tax" is a regressive tax that will favor the rich and further imprison the 50 inch HDTV renting trailer park residents of this country, and therefore I think it SUCKS. Paying taxes on what you spend is all well and good, and seems like a flat tax, which in itself is harder on the poor/little guy, as they have less left after taxes. But tell me someone who makes $20MM a year is going to spend $20MM and pay taxes on everything. What about someone who makes $20K?? Yes they will spend it all, so their tax is 23% and the rich guys is 23% of what he spends, plus the 2-3% that is levied on income greater than X? What a joke. Don't support this tax until you read it and see if it agrees with your overall sensibilities, not just your own self-interest at the poker tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

The joke is that you totally misrepresent the facts. the poor pay less under the fair tax not more. Monthly rebates are sent according to income.

from the Fair Tax FAQ

"Under the FairTax plan, poor people pay no net FairTax at all up to the poverty level! Every household receives a rebate that is equal to the FairTax paid on essential goods and services, and wage earners are no longer subject to the most regressive and burdensome tax of all, the payroll tax. Those spending at twice the poverty level pay a tax of only 11.5 percent a rate much lower than the income and payroll tax burden they bear today.

Under the federal income tax, slow economic growth and recessions have a disproportionately adverse impact on lower-income families. Breadwinners in these families are more likely to lose their jobs, are less likely to have the resources to weather bad economic times, and are more in need of the initial employment opportunities that a dynamic, growing economy provides. Retaining the present tax system makes economic progress needlessly slow, thus harming low-income people the most."


here is a comparative chart of the two effective rates.


[/ QUOTE ]
My favorite part of this post is the print at the bottom of the graph that says "annual income=annual expenditures". DUCY?

[/ QUOTE ]

If the fair tax "effective tax rate" on income (since income and expenditures are assumed equal) is less than or equal to the current effective tax rate at all points, where is the extra revenue coming from?

Also the graph appears to be asymptotic to a line of about 25% for the "current effective tax rate" which is nonsense if you include all of the taxes the fair tax is supposed to replace. That means an even wider gap between current taxes and the fair tax (if the fair tax line is accurate).

Something is funky in Denmark.

[Felz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So, if you spend all of your income, you get tax punished. If you invest, or save your income, you doge some taxation?


So, heavy consumers pick up the tax bill for the heavy savers.

Rich people save, middle/poor class spend all earnings.

So, middle class punished?

[/ QUOTE ]

*ding ding*

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the purpose of savings again?

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]

So, middle class punished?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you against people being punished for their stupidity?

Under the Fairtax proposal take home pay will be higher because there is no more withholding so there is money to be invested or saved for middle class families that they otherwise wouldn't have.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So, middle class punished?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you against people being punished for their stupidity?

[/ QUOTE ]
How are they being stupid? Some people don't have enough to save, they only have enough to get by.
[ QUOTE ]
Under the Fairtax proposal take home pay will be higher because there is no more withholding so there is money to be invested or saved for middle class families that they otherwise wouldn't have.

[/ QUOTE ]
The claim is that the "fair tax" would take more from the middle class then the previous system. It would definitely be an incredibly increased burden on the lower class.

[The Truth]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

So, middle class punished?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you against people being punished for their stupidity?

Under the Fairtax proposal take home pay will be higher because there is no more withholding so there is money to be invested or saved for middle class families that they otherwise wouldn't have.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not "against" it. I am just analyzing the effects of it.


I think it is funny that alot of the people all for the fair tax are the people who are going to get punished the worst. They just like the idea of paying it slowly everytime they buy something better than the idea of paying it all at once.

Its like the poker rake. If it is slipped out slowly, then people don't notice as much.


It is friggen awesome for rich people. They are used to saving money. Poor/middle class people HATE paying out lump sums cause they hate saving. So, they get the middle class screaming, "let us pay some of the rich peoples taxes please god!"

Ship it!


(also, I realize it isn't exactly correct to do class based analysis. I know guys that make 100k a year that save alot because they are good at money management. I know guys that make 300k a year and spend every dime and have to take out loans to cover taxes. However, I believe the general upper/lower distinction is correct.)