Page 4 of 37 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 365
Like Tree115Likes

Thread: FairTax and Trade

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #31
    Senior Member johnwk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    2,483

    Judy, why do you misrepresent the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by Judy View Post

    I understand you have a different plan that just bills the states for an amount of money and then the states come up with it however they choose.
    Judy, why are you are misrepresenting the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment? Adopting it would return us to our Constitution's original tax plan as our Founders intended it to operate and have Congress raising its revenue from imposts, duties and internal excise taxes levied upon specifically selected articles of consumption. It basically has Congress raising its revenue by taxing consumption. I thought that is what you desire.

    Additionally, it forbids Congress to raise any revenue from taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries or any other lawfully realized money. Is this not what you want?

    Finally, if Congress spends more than is brought in from the above mentioned sources, then, and only then, is Congress required to make up the difference with an apportioned direct tax. Do we not need to force this fiscal restraint upon Congress and end deficit spending?


    JWK
    Last edited by johnwk; 06-07-2018 at 10:31 AM.

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    San Bernardino, CA
    Posts
    1,810
    Quote Originally Posted by johnwk View Post
    the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment? Adopting it would return us to our Constitution's original tax plan as our Founders intended it to operate and have Congress raising its revenue from imposts, duties and internal excise taxes levied upon specifically selected articles of consumption.
    What I read on that doesn't cut it either. We cannot sustain our government and people solely on taxes from imports. We need "internal revenue".

    Taxing income is not unreasonable, except that it is not that reliable. Taxing consumption can collect from a broader source, which can make it fairer. Obviously, since there is such a variety of potential sources, taxing should be distributed from multiple sources.

    Your desire to return to our original taxing method would be a disaster, IMHO. If we isolated our economy for any reason, and we were dependent on taxes from imports, our government would be instantly broke.

    Our own businesses create tremendous amounts of revenue. We should be the source of our own financing. Import taxes should be used to adjust pricing to protect our businesses, but also encourage fair trade foreign countries.

  3. #33
    Senior Member johnwk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    2,483
    Quote Originally Posted by jtdc View Post
    What I read on that doesn't cut it either. We cannot sustain our government and people solely on taxes from imports. We need "internal revenue".
    Why are you, like Judy, misrepresenting the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment?


    JWK

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    San Bernardino, CA
    Posts
    1,810
    Quote Originally Posted by johnwk View Post
    Why are you, like Judy, misrepresenting the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment?
    I didn't know I was. Looking on Google, it seems to be a figment of your imagination, not a Congressional proposal. And what I read is what you have written before that I don't support.

    This country has changed drastically from what it was when the Constitution was written. Your idea that we could go back to that system is not realistic, IMHO.

    People don't want an income tax. People don't want a VAT tax. People don't want a sales tax. Each has their advantages and their deficits. It is finding a balance. And I don't see that in your proposal or Judy's FairTax. Some have proposed a "Penny Tax", which incrementally raises the tax each year to pay down the National Debt. But that also is a limited system.

    I favor a VAT type system. But the VAT system I have seem proposed hides the actual tax. With a sales tax, consumers can see how much their government is gutting them. With what we have, many people haven't a clue as to what their taxes actually are. I had employees who thought that IRS refunds was the government giving them money. They couldn't understand that the withholding I took out of their pay was actually like a savings account. That is was actually their money being returned to them.

    Then of course there is the FICA. On your pay check it shows 6.2% of your pay withheld. But that is a lie. When an employer assesses the cost of an employee the "Employer Contribution" is as much a factor as anything else. So the actual amount withheld from an employee's pay is 12.4%. But the government doesn't want employees to know that. They might write their representative.

    So taxes are collected by several different methods, income, sales, business taxes, tariffs and the like, so that the actual amount of tax government is really collecting from each person is not that apparent.

  5. #35
    Senior Member johnwk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    2,483
    Quote Originally Posted by johnwk View Post
    Why are you, like Judy, misrepresenting the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment?



    Quote Originally Posted by jtdc View Post
    I didn't know I was. .



    Last edited by johnwk; 06-07-2018 at 08:17 PM.

  6. #36
    Senior Member Judy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    55,883
    Quote Originally Posted by johnwk View Post
    Judy, why are you are misrepresenting the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment? Adopting it would return us to our Constitution's original tax plan as our Founders intended it to operate and have Congress raising its revenue from imposts, duties and internal excise taxes levied upon specifically selected articles of consumption. It basically has Congress raising its revenue by taxing consumption. I thought that is what you desire.

    Additionally, it forbids Congress to raise any revenue from taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries or any other lawfully realized money. Is this not what you want?

    Finally, if Congress spends more than is brought in from the above mentioned sources, then, and only then, is Congress required to make up the difference with an apportioned direct tax. Do we not need to force this fiscal restraint upon Congress and end deficit spending?


    JWK
    The FairTax taxes consumption as the founders intended, so why do you oppose it? We still have tariffs, imposts, duties and excise taxes under the FairTax, so what is your beef against it? Congress still has the right to send states bills under the apportionment method for shortfalls with the FairTax, even though Congress has never done so in the history of our nation, that authority is not changed by the FairTax legislation.

    Deficit spending is unwise, but Constitutional. At least 70% of the national debt has accrued since the time the FairTax was introduced into Congress in 1999, so while people who claim to be concerned with deficit spending waste time and our country arguing against the FairTax that would have solved it while robustly funding SS and Medicare, the FairTax sits idle in committee for 19 years.

    An amazing group of Americans delivered a tax plan for the country in 1999 called the FairTax, that would have prevented this free trade disaster, the national debt disaster which is a direct consequence of the free trade disaster, raised our standard of living, eliminated most poverty, curbed most illegal immigration, kept SS and Medicare Trust Fund flush with cash, freed our businesses and citizens from the burden, cost and intrusion of federally mandatory income taxation and more than adequately funded our government, military and infrastructure.

    So the way it looks to me, is those who opposed the FairTax for reasons they can't even explain are the ones who kept this brilliant legislative solution to so many of our problems buried in a Swamp Committee while our country burned itself into the World's Largest Banana Republic with $22 trillion in debt we can never repay and 30 million and growing illegal aliens we can't even afford to deport.

    This tells me at least some Americans are still in bed with the Swamp they claim to oppose who either do not grasp the gravity of our situation or do not care.
    Last edited by Judy; 06-08-2018 at 05:52 AM.
    A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
    Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  7. #37
    Senior Member johnwk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    2,483

    Judy, why must you make stuff up when promoting the alleged fairtax?

    Quote Originally Posted by Judy View Post
    The FairTax taxes consumption as the founders intended . . .

    Judy, why are you misrepresenting how the founders intended to tax consumption?

    The fact is, when taxing consumption, our Founders intended each article would be selected, and a specific amount of tax would be levied on each specific article selected. This of course allows the market place determine an allowable limit of tax on each article selected. If any article is taxed too high it would "... lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds."


    Selecting each article also allows the necessities of life to be excluded from the list of taxable articles, and also allows the "rich may be extravagant, the poor can be frugal; and private oppression may always be avoided by a judicious selection of objects proper for such impositions."


    The alleged fairtax, which is an across the board tax all consumer articles, and an across the board tax on the sale of labor, is not what our founders intended, nor is it allowable under the specific taxing powers granted to Congress.


    Instead of misrepresenting the founders intentions to give legitimacy to the alleged fairtax, you ought to explain why it is superior to our founders method of taxing consumption.

    Let us now review our founders true intentions with regard to taxing consumption.



    Hamilton stresses in Federalist No 21 regarding taxes on articles of consumption:


    “There is no method of steering clear of this inconvenience, but by authorizing the national government to raise its own revenues in its own way. Imposts, excises, and, in general, all duties upon articles of consumption, may be compared to a fluid, which will, in time, find its level with the means of paying them. The amount to be contributed by each citizen will in a degree be at his own option, and can be regulated by an attention to his resources. The rich may be extravagant, the poor can be frugal; and private oppression may always be avoided by a judicious selection of objects proper for such impositions. If inequalities should arise in some States from duties on particular objects, these will, in all probability, be counter balanced by proportional inequalities in other States, from the duties on other objects. In the course of time and things, an equilibrium, as far as it is attainable in so complicated a subject, will be established everywhere. Or, if inequalities should still exist, they would neither be so great in their degree, so uniform in their operation, nor so odious in their appearance, as those which would necessarily spring from quotas, upon any scale that can possibly be devised.


    It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption that they contain in their own nature a security against excess. They prescribe their own limit; which cannot be exceeded without defeating the end proposed, that is, an extension of the revenue. When applied to this object, the saying is as just as it is witty, that, "in political arithmetic, two and two do not always make four .'' If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds. This forms a complete barrier against any material oppression of the citizens by taxes of this class, and is itself a natural limitation of the power of imposing them.”






    For confirmation on how our founders intended to tax consumption here is a link to our countries first revenue raising act An Act for laying a Duty on Goods, Wares and Merchandise imported into the United States. Note how each article is selected and a specific amount of tax is laid upon the article selected.


    Why must you make stuff up when promoting the alleged fairtax? The fact is, the alleged fairtax, an across the board tax on consumption removes the protections our founders intended by requiring each article to be selected and a specific amount of tax to be determine on each article selected. Why do you want to remove the protections intended by our founders?



    JWK



    “…a national revenue must be obtained; but the system must be such a one, that, while it secures the object of revenue it shall not be oppressive to our constituents.”___ ___Madison, during the creation of our Nation’s first revenue raising Act
    Last edited by johnwk; 06-08-2018 at 09:08 AM.

  8. #38
    Senior Member Judy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    55,883
    Johnwk wrote:

    Selecting each article also allows the necessities of life to be excluded from the list of taxable articles,
    The FairTax excludes the necessities of life from the FairTax through the rebate.

    The FairTax also excludes all used articles, only taxing new products and services.

    The alleged fairtax, which is an across the board tax all consumer articles, and an across the board tax on the sale of labor, is not what our founders intended, nor is it allowable under the specific taxing powers granted to Congress.
    Because the FairTax is charged to the consumer purchasing the labor/service and not on the worker or business, I have absolutely no problem with that. There were quite a few things about "labor" that the Founders didn't get right.
    A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
    Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  9. #39
    Senior Member johnwk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    2,483
    Quote Originally Posted by Judy View Post


    The FairTax . . .
    Are you now admitting you misrepresented how the founders intended to tax consumption? Remember, you did write: "
    The FairTax taxes consumption as the founders intended . . ."


    JWK

  10. #40
    Senior Member Judy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    55,883
    No, I'm not. I believe the Founders would review the FairTax and go "damn, why didn't we think of that."

    When I first learned about the FairTax, I thought they were talking about the Flat Tax (single rate income tax). This was in 2005-2006. When the poster on another forum clarified the difference and I looked up the legislation for the FairTax, read it thoroughly, analyzed it, and understood it, I said "damn, this is it, this is the one, it addresses every single issue with a national sales tax to replace the income tax" something I had long supported, but there were issues to be worked out that until the FairTax came along hadn't been.

    The FairTax is one of the most important single pieces of economic development legislation ever introduced into the US Congress, which explains of course why it's been buried in a Swamp Committee for 19 years by free trade, open borders globalists. We have more than enough Republicans who support the FairTax to get out there and lobby it in Congress and explain it to the public whenever we have a President with the knowledge and courage to support it. I hope Trump is the one to do that for our citizens, businesses and country. And I think he is. I sure hope so anyway!!



    Hey, Mr. President, take a look here at Judy's Five Steps To Fix the US Economy that I've posted for almost 13 years:

    Judy's Five Steps To Fix the US Economy:

    1. end illegal immigration and reduce legal immigration
    2. pass the FairTax
    3. protect our trade
    4. end the War on Drugs
    5. drill baby drill, but do it right


    Mr. President, if you will openly support the FairTax, HR 25 in the US House of Representatives, you'll have a perfect record. You like perfect records don't you?! Of course you do, you're a Fair-minded, Common Sense, Intelligent, Loyal American President, a Wiinner who likes TO WIN!!

    LETS WIN SOME MORE!! SUPPORT THE FAIRTAX, HR 25 in the US House of Representatives.
    Last edited by Judy; 06-08-2018 at 01:57 PM.
    A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
    Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn

Page 4 of 37 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Georgia FairTax Bill Introduced in the House
    By JohnDoe2 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-04-2015, 01:43 PM
  2. Idea for FairTax Supporters
    By Judy in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-17-2011, 11:44 AM
  3. FairTax Friday - Tax Day 2010 - Stand Up For America
    By Judy in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-09-2010, 11:57 AM
  4. FairTax Friday
    By Judy in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-04-2009, 03:41 PM
  5. The FairTax -- The Truth
    By CitizenJustice in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-02-2007, 07:29 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •