We need to replace all taxes with a land value tax

Evolution corresponds to a symphony of facts.

 

yes, it is an evolution for the left to learn how to merely Use capitalism for all of its worth with a wealth and symphony of market based metrics and facts.

 

Its not possible to understand macroeconomic outcome purely through microeconomic modelling. This tells us that the individual is often powerless and, by ignoring the need for state correction, individualism is inherently harmed by concentration of power created by the innate characteristics of capitalism.

 

Orderliness alleviates pure opportunities.

Love is at the heart of new destiny.

 

State representatives are elected officials, elected by individuals. What do you want? A free for all? I don't understand what your proposal is. Maybe you could outline it for me?

 

What's not fair about it? Those people who are rich, spend more money on items. They buy luxury items that the rest of us cannot. They would pay more sales tax, but their inheritances, etc. would be left alone. Getting rid of an income tax leaves people with more disposable income. You work, earn your check, and it is yours to keep entirely instead of giving a portion of it away to the government for taxes. A fair tax is also, in theory, supposed to get rid of all other taxes, land/property taxes, inheritance tax, etc.

Slavery? That is hyperbole and silly.

I live in a dream world? Now that is hilarious given the things you are talking about. What is actually happening in "your" world? Why don't you explain something coherently about your positions instead of making silly accusations?

There are a lot of things a person can do which can make them a "criminal."

Now, outline exactly what it is you have in mind? Anarchy? No government? What is YOUR proposal?

- - - Updated - - -

How is the individual "powerless?" You know, it would be nice if some of you could explain your positions in a clear and coherent way. You do realize that state representatives are elected BY THE PEOPLE of each individual state to represent them?

- - - Updated - - -

Dude, I don't even know what this means. Lol.

 

So you're saying you haven't a clue and somehow that should translate into "fair"!!! Your whole fallacy is based on completely false premises. There is no problem as there is, when I choose to work (don't need to) I keep it all as is, completely. I have for almost 20 years now, all legally.

[Slavery? That is hyperbole and silly.[/quote]

For one that doesn't seem to understand anything about reality to declare something hyperbole and silly is but a slave denying the existence of slavery.

They seem to be beyond your comprehension, hence the declared lack of cohesion. You have completely misrepresented the spending habits of the rich while totally ignoring the devastating effects upon the poor. You pray to a master while rejecting the ideology of slavery. Therefore, it seems you will never understand the concept of freedom, much less it's actions.

Again, basing a theory on false premises. For a freeman, there is only one, harm without restitution, for a slave it could be anything and everything.

Anarchy, you would never understand anarchy and would rather live in chaos as if you would understand the difference. No government, absolutely but again you do not understand and can't from the standpoint of slavery. To understand you would need to understand, first slavery, and then that no man is a master.

My proposal, I have no proposal. I care less what the next person does so long as it does not impede me. When it does, I deal with it, very severely.

 

It is why policies public, should promote the general welfare and function as that form of Investment in our Republic by functioning as public sector means of production whenever practicable. In that manner, the left (wing) may still pick up the banner of supply side economics dropped by the right (wing), and insist supply side economics must supply us with better governance at lower cost--not, trickle down.

 

Your sales tax proposal would cause some sort of price inflation and or job losses. Businesses have to pay sales tax on a great many of their purchases too and that would have to be taken as either increased prices on the outbound side of their goods and services or be offset by firing people.

 

I think you are clueless. I posted you link as to what a fair tax means. I guess you don't understand it. Not my problem. What exactly are you ranting about? I have no idea. Lol.

WHAT are you talking about? What is it that you consider slavery? Instead of getting a bad attitude, perhaps you should explain your position more clearly.

You STILL have not clarified your position. Why don't you try that instead of ranting? That would be nice. This is a discussion board, so discuss.

Again, you make no sense at all. Instead of ranting, try explaining your position.

All I did was say what is wrong with a fair tax. . . . obviously, you have some kind of issues you need to work out. Lol.

??? So you're on a thread about taxes and you have no sane argument. I see.

 

Lol. Well, it is not MY proposal. It is a well known proposal that already exists. I didn't make it up. I happen to think it's a lot better than the status quo. I don't know how this would effect businesses. It's more about the individual tax payer.

 

It is well known and not well supported in research on the matter. The only model I have seen on it is dated, but put the tax at generating maybe half of the US tax needs. That is a far cry from 97% paying no taxes and getting a check back instead as was suggested by another poster. Unless they are tax exempt like a church, businesses pay sales taxes too.

 

Well, why couldn't it be tweaked for businesses? I mean, if we're going to rearrange the whole tax system, why not?

 

Can't agree with you on this one, Chris.

I don't see it being an improvement on the status quo, not that I'm a fan of the status quo. I just think those types of sales tax rates would cause a huge damper on the economy, on consumer spending, thus harming business, resulting job losses, and a downhill spiral.

I'm all for tax reform, but not this way. That is if I understand your stance correctly?

 

It really wouldn't change the prices of goods all THAT much. A $100 item would cost $120. A $1000 item would cost $1200. Of course, once you get up into luxury items you would pay more, but mostly rich or wealthy people are the ones spending money on luxury items. Also, you would have all that much more disposable income to begin with if you eliminated income tax altogether, which is 30% of your income, on average, IIRC.

 

Really?
The average volume of retail sales in the US is about $2Trillion a year. The average volume of transactions on the stock and bond and futures and derivatives markets in the US is over $1Trillion a week.

The fair tax would impose the entire tax burden on just a small portion of economic activity, which coincidentally is the portion of the economy that all people need to participate in to survive. It would exempt from taxation the vastly larger portion of the economy that only those with savings and wealth participate in.

I need some fair tax proponent to explain to me how imposing the entire tax burden on paying for the necessities of life while exempting the speculative gambling of excess wealth is a fair distribution of the tax burden.

 

Well, there is no such thing as a "perfect system." It would certainly simplify the tax system and people would have more disposable income. Here is a site with the pros and cons listed for you.

http://www.moneycrashers.com/fair-tax-act-explained-pros-cons/

 

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Have a good weekend!

 

It is expected that people use their own words to express their point of view.
I do not follow links so if you are trying to answer me you are failing.

 

It explains everything you want to know there instead of me having to type out lengthy paragraphs, so if you don't want to learn more about it and just have an attitude, that's fine by me. Don't read it.

 

I am just trying to have a conversation here, with you.
If you are unwilling to use your own words have a nice day.
Someone else will show up who can speak for themselves, there is no shortage of people here who do that.

 

Whatever. I think you are looking for an argument. That's what I think. If you wanted to learn more about the Fair Tax, you would look at the link and then discuss like an adult.

 

The business climate tends to affect the individual taxpayer.

 

Well, if all other taxes were eliminated for a business, then I don't think the sales tax would be any more money. Maybe there could be different rules for businesses?

 

I would have to research that aspect more and see if there are any alternatives and/or what rules could be made to balance things off for businesses, the potential for fraud and other things like that.