• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Presidential Candidate Herman Cain

END_THE_FED

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
925
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
He supports the Fair Tax. That goes a long way to winning my support.

While I would prefer most aspects of the "fair tax" over the way the "Income Tax" is currently being implemented, I fear that they would start collecting "Income Tax" again shortly after starting the "Fair Tax".

The President will have very little effect on passing the "Fair Tax", its implementation would require a Constitutional Amendment.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
While I would prefer most aspects of the "fair tax" over the way the "Income Tax" is currently being implemented, I fear that they would start collecting "Income Tax" again shortly after starting the "Fair Tax".

The President will have very little effect on passing the "Fair Tax", its implementation would require a Constitutional Amendment.

The enabling legislation requires the repeal of the constitutional authority to levy an income tax. Until the repeal happens, the Fair Tax would not go into effect, but would remain there, waiting to spring into being the instant the repeal happens.

The president may have nothing to do with constitutional amendments, however he can propose legislation, and has the bully pulpit. A real discussion on the Fair Tax will not happen until we have a major candidate who supports it. Until then, we will only get the media misrepresentations of it.

Taxes are necessary. But, taxes are tyrannical. The Fair Tax is the least tyrannical of all tax proposals I have heard. Our current system, and its requisite IRS, is hopelessly oppressive and has to go.
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
Revenuers were around before the IRS, they will be around after. It might or might not be as invasive as an income tax; it is basically a gross revenue tax instead of profit tax. I'd rather see the feds go back to revenue sources they had before the 16th: alcohol making tax, tariffs, public land resources.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Revenuers were around before the IRS, they will be around after. It might or might not be as invasive as an income tax; it is basically a gross revenue tax instead of profit tax. I'd rather see the feds go back to revenue sources they had before the 16th: alcohol making tax, tariffs, public land resources.

The difference is more stark than that. Income taxes (corporate and individual) drive up the cost of domestic production and is part of the reason that American products are pricing themselves out of the market domestically and abroad. By shifting the tax to the demand side, the cost of production of American products goes down, and the cost of consumption of both domestic and imported products goes up. Of course, since some of the cost is now borne by products produced outside the US, the wholesale price benefit these products used to enjoy partially evaporates.

More domestically produced products sell, creates more jobs, injects more available dollars, more products sell, revenues increase.

There are a thousand other reasons why taxing the demand side makes more sense than taxing the supply side. This was just three of them.
 
Top