Not this Fairtax crap again........
I don't agree with everything this guy says but he has some very good counterpoints to the delusional support of the whatever-tax.
(PDF) http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/files/bartlett_fair_tax.pdf
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Clinton/Obama vs McCain & ?
- Thread starter corrie
- Start date
Not this Fairtax crap again........
I don't agree with everything this guy says but he has some very good counterpoints to the delusional support of the whatever-tax.
(PDF) http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/files/bartlett_fair_tax.pdf
phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
I wasn't trying to bring up a debate about the FairTax, because everyone believes in something different. I was merely pointing out the reasons that I am not going to vote for McCain.Not this Fairtax crap again........
I don't agree with everything this guy says but he has some very good counterpoints to the delusional support of the whatever-tax.
I do like how I've just been labeled as delusional, without even knowing what research I've done and why I think it's a good idea. Thanks for that.
You might as well be using L. Ron Hubbard to refute Darwin's theories.Not this Fairtax crap again........
I don't agree with everything this guy says but he has some very good counterpoints to the delusional support of the whatever-tax.
(PDF) http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/files/bartlett_fair_tax.pdf
Hell, why not use an apple as a lathe? It'd be about as apt an analogy.
The people who are at the head of the Fairtax have been studying thei ssue for twenty years. I think they've already had all the criticisms and questions posed to them. I am reading the book right now though and then will read the website.
HOWEVER, I do not believe the Fairtax is a good idea right now because we would first need a Constitutional amendment to prevent Congress from re-instituting an income tax.
I could see it now, we get the Fairtax passed and the income tax abolished, then ten to twenty years down the road, some a-hole in Congress says we need to institute an income tax.
One problem I am wondering though is, in the Fairtax book, they say that the Republicans said originally that they would not vote for a permanent income tax unless a Constitutional amendment was passed allowing it, because surely such an amendment would NEVER pass through Congress, right?
It sailed through.
So what I wonder is, let's assume we amend the Consititution to say, "NO INCOME TAX!" and implement the Fairtax...well what is to stop the same thing from happening, some guy in Congress says, "We "need" an income tax," and conservatives and libertarians say, "Not without a Constitutional amendment that would allow it..." and thus the amendment get passed...?
Unless this Constitutional amendment were to say that Congress cannot implement an income tax unless they at the same time get rid of the Fairtax...?
Sounds good to me, but he will run a large deficit unless the Congress works to get rid of a good chunk of those social programs (which the Democrat-controlled Congress would not do right now).
HOWEVER, I do not believe the Fairtax is a good idea right now because we would first need a Constitutional amendment to prevent Congress from re-instituting an income tax.
I could see it now, we get the Fairtax passed and the income tax abolished, then ten to twenty years down the road, some a-hole in Congress says we need to institute an income tax.
One problem I am wondering though is, in the Fairtax book, they say that the Republicans said originally that they would not vote for a permanent income tax unless a Constitutional amendment was passed allowing it, because surely such an amendment would NEVER pass through Congress, right?
It sailed through.
So what I wonder is, let's assume we amend the Consititution to say, "NO INCOME TAX!" and implement the Fairtax...well what is to stop the same thing from happening, some guy in Congress says, "We "need" an income tax," and conservatives and libertarians say, "Not without a Constitutional amendment that would allow it..." and thus the amendment get passed...?
Unless this Constitutional amendment were to say that Congress cannot implement an income tax unless they at the same time get rid of the Fairtax...?
Sounds good to me, but he will run a large deficit unless the Congress works to get rid of a good chunk of those social programs (which the Democrat-controlled Congress would not do right now).
Huh?
OK, maybe not my best comparison ever, but Bruce Bartlett has used everything from splitting hairs over how the actual percentage of the flat tax is calculated to trying to associate it with Scientology IOT discredit the fair tax.
http://www.fairtax.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1541&page=NewsArticle&id=8645
http://www.fairtax.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=1541&page=NewsArticle&id=8282
Romney decides to pull ads in S.C., Fla.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080109/ap_on_el_pr/romney_money
Where everyone thought he would empty his seemingly bottomless piggybank, he is going to lose any momentum he had.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080109/ap_on_el_pr/romney_money
Where everyone thought he would empty his seemingly bottomless piggybank, he is going to lose any momentum he had.
blur
A-pool
Come on, people. All you A-holes start fantasizing about your candidates after they win a single small primary/caucus like they're going to sweep the rest of the campaign. This is what the media does to get ratings - the rest of you should know better! Clue: McCain won the NH primary prior to the the 2004 election too, but never had a chance in hell at winning the GOP slot.
Everybody throttle the fuck back.
Brett
I agree it's still pretty early, but I don't think you can compare the Bush Machine of 2000 (The Bush establishment and Karl Rove) to what McCain is up against now. Bush was pretty much guaranteed to get the GOP nom...
It's better to get involved too early than not at all, no?
blur
A-pool
If it's his negative ads, then it's probably a good thing. If you go for exit polls, those ads showed to do more harm than good.
Change negative ads to positive ads.....no harm done then.....I would rather him just withdraw from the race.
How come?
Just thought this was interesting: http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/190668.php
Here's how I see things panning out in the next few weeks:
MI goes for McCain (Romney in very close 2nd) and Obama and Hillary so close that it won't be seen as a big win or loss by either. Romney's got ties to the state, but nothing very recent, and McCain's in the news a lot now as "resurgent". Obama's popular with the unions lately but the Clintons go back further; I don't know how much pull they still have in MI politics.
SC big for Huckabee (McCain distant 2nd, Romney even more distant 3rd) and Obama. Big evangelical voting bloc in SC, and they have no use for McCain, especially against a bona-fide Southern Baptist preacher. Lots of black Democrat voters there; I don't believe that "race politics" is nearly so big a factor as it once was, but I don't think there's any way they'll vote for Hillary instead.
Florida may go for Giuliani - he's putting all his chips on winning there, and he's polling well, but I don't know if people will vote for someone they don't see as really "in the race" - and Obama. Hillary has made a lot of her campaign as carrying on Bill's presidency, and he was very unpopular with the Cubans in South Fl. It's very difficult for a Democrat to win Florida without the Cuban vote.
So going into Super Tuesday, Romney will be on the ropes and will need some big wins to stay in the race. Hillary will be battered, but not out, and her campaign will be frantically reinventing her yet again. Obama will be set up as the Dem "front runner" barring any huge fuck-ups on his part. Huckabee will do very well in southern states, McCain will do well elsewhere. I think it's going to be a long-run horse race for the GOP nomination. Huckabee may pull ahead as money from evangelicals and social conservatives starts to come in; a lot will depend on whether McCain can turn the NH win into long-term campaign support.
Or I may be completely wrong.
MI goes for McCain (Romney in very close 2nd) and Obama and Hillary so close that it won't be seen as a big win or loss by either. Romney's got ties to the state, but nothing very recent, and McCain's in the news a lot now as "resurgent". Obama's popular with the unions lately but the Clintons go back further; I don't know how much pull they still have in MI politics.
SC big for Huckabee (McCain distant 2nd, Romney even more distant 3rd) and Obama. Big evangelical voting bloc in SC, and they have no use for McCain, especially against a bona-fide Southern Baptist preacher. Lots of black Democrat voters there; I don't believe that "race politics" is nearly so big a factor as it once was, but I don't think there's any way they'll vote for Hillary instead.
Florida may go for Giuliani - he's putting all his chips on winning there, and he's polling well, but I don't know if people will vote for someone they don't see as really "in the race" - and Obama. Hillary has made a lot of her campaign as carrying on Bill's presidency, and he was very unpopular with the Cubans in South Fl. It's very difficult for a Democrat to win Florida without the Cuban vote.
So going into Super Tuesday, Romney will be on the ropes and will need some big wins to stay in the race. Hillary will be battered, but not out, and her campaign will be frantically reinventing her yet again. Obama will be set up as the Dem "front runner" barring any huge fuck-ups on his part. Huckabee will do very well in southern states, McCain will do well elsewhere. I think it's going to be a long-run horse race for the GOP nomination. Huckabee may pull ahead as money from evangelicals and social conservatives starts to come in; a lot will depend on whether McCain can turn the NH win into long-term campaign support.
Or I may be completely wrong.