razztaz, I can see it is pointless to argue with you and a waste of my time.
Have a good day.
Charlie
I knew you hadn't read the book. Have a nice day. Anybody else? The buffet is open. Serve yourself
razztaz, I can see it is pointless to argue with you and a waste of my time.
Have a good day.
Charlie
razztazz said:I knew you hadn't read the book. Have a nice day. Anybody else? The buffet is open. Serve yourself
((^+^)) SG said:Anyone who believes that corporations are going to pass along tax reductions in their pricing has never sat in on a large corporation marketing meeting that sets prices.
The un-Fair tax lets corporations and the wealthy out of paying a number of direct taxes and pushes all tax collection onto the consumer. Anyone who believes that this kind of program is going to be good for the consumer probably believes in the tooth fairy.
Anyone who believes that we can move from an income tax system to a sales tax system and still allow retired consumers to come out ahead apparently doesn't understand what "income" and "consumption" mean.
But on the other hand . . . anyone who isn't outraged by our current administration just isn't paying attention.
((^+^)) SG said:Anyone who believes that corporations are going to pass along tax reductions in their pricing has never sat in on a large corporation marketing meeting that sets prices.
The un-Fair tax lets corporations and the wealthy out of paying a number of direct taxes and pushes all tax collection onto the consumer. Anyone who believes that this kind of program is going to be good for the consumer probably believes in the tooth fairy.
Anyone who believes that we can move from an income tax system to a sales tax system and still allow retired consumers to come out ahead apparently doesn't understand what "income" and "consumption" mean.
But on the other hand . . . anyone who isn't outraged by our current administration just isn't paying attention.
((^+^)) SG said:The un-Fair tax lets corporations and the wealthy out of paying a number of direct taxes and pushes all tax collection onto the consumer. Anyone who believes that this kind of program is going to be good for the consumer probably believes in the tooth fairy.
((^+^)) SG said:But on the other hand . . . anyone who isn't outraged by our current administration just isn't paying attention.
charlie said:SG, I think you may be making the mistake of extrapolating one
or two data points to draw a general conclusion. I seriously doubt
that you have sat in on a representative number of companies
marketing meetings.
charlie said:Take my sector for example (laundromats).
It is very hard to raise prices to match inflation due to the
extreme saturation of the market in the "good" areas.
Yes, and what data or marketing survey are you reading that indicates that the Fair Tax will change the fate of the American auto manufacturers? That's rediculous. There is not such data from any reliable source. Just because some neo-con spouts that propaganda doesn't make it true. The American auto manufacturers have plenty of problems that keep them from being more competitive with Asian manufactureres. Frankly, I doubt that you could give American cars away in much of the world.charlie said:The American auto manufacturers would welcome the chance to
regain some market share as well, IMO. The list is a long one.
charlie said:BTW, I am still waiting for you to correct the calculation error
in an earlier post that I responded to in reply #91. Your
conclusion based on that example is not supported by a
correct calculation.
charlie said:I think we are at the point where we should agree to disagree,
don't you? The only reason I posted this was to provide a
counter balance.
This is almost funny.Patrick said:Quite a bit of personal criticism of "anyone" in this post. How about some facts instead of personal attacks?
((^+^)) SG said:For all of you un-Fair Tax proponents: If you are convinced that you will pay less, who do you think is going to pay more?
((^+^)) SG said:For all of you un-Fair Tax proponents: If you are convinced that you will pay less, who do you think is going to pay more?
((^+^)) SG said:Charlie, I believe that you are going to believe whatever you hear spouted from this administration. I am going to believe what the calculations show me. I've plugged in real data for my life situation and I can see that the un-Fair Tax does not seem fair to me at all. In fact, it would cost me an equivalent of about $250,000 in current retirement nest egg value (about $9000 per year).
Austin_Explorer said:. . . For every argument that the sales tax proposal is unfair I can come up with an example of how the current system is unfair. No system will be fair for every possible example you can conjure up. Get over it.
. . .
amt said:Your blind hatred of this administration makes you so blind to everything. Are you still living in 2000, dreaming of President-elect Al? Get over it. After all, the fairtax is not Bush's idea; he didn't even look into it until recently. I'm not his favorite fan, but I do pity people like you filled with hatred.
Wow. :amt said:You answered your own question. Wealthy people like you who have amassed a fortune out of the sweat equity of the working class should be ashamed to want to cling on to the current system which rewards free spending and borrowing, while punishing hard work. You rich people are opposed to fairtax out of selfishness. You like the current system because you can avoid income tax much more easily than you can the fairtax. You can ask your lobbyists to get more gimmes at the expense of the rest of the American people. Did you know the income tax percentage of Mrs. Teresa Highness Kerry? It's around 12%. Definitely less than that of someone who is making $20,000/yr.
Your blind hatred of this administration makes you so blind to everything. Are you still living in 2000, dreaming of President-elect Al? Get over it. After all, the fairtax is not Bush's idea; he didn't even look into it until recently. I'm not his favorite fan, but I do pity people like you filled with hatred.
amt said:Did you know the income tax percentage of Mrs. Teresa Highness Kerry? It's around 12%. Definitely less than that of someone who is making $20,000/yr.
Charlie,charlie said:SG, you consistently make the same mistake in your calculations.
If a widget is priced at $100, you will pay an additional tax of $30,
not $23.
This alters the conclusion in your post #76 (couple earning $100,000)
posted on Aug 11, 2005 at 12:25:27 on this thread. I replied on
post #91, same thread.
Price*(1-Corp Tax Savings)*30% = Price*23%
Solve for Corp Tax Savings and you come up with 23%
So you are saying the corporations will pay tax under the new proposal. I think that is true.charlie said:. . .
As for corporations not paying any taxes, that is bogus. All companies
and the government too for, that matter, will pay the fair tax on goods
and services not directly tied to the price of a widget (indirect overhead).
Companies will have to pay the tax on new equipment, new buildings,
etc. as I understand the proposal.
But the corporations are still going to save 22% to 25% in taxes.charlie said:As for the tax already built into the current price of goods and services,
the estimate is 22-25% according to the studies quoted by the fair
tax group. . . .
I am skeptical of a number provided without backup by the proponents of the proposal. I would think that the ratio of corporate tax to product cost varies dramatically from product to product. Items requiring high amounts of high skilled labor might include quite a bit of social security and medicare tax in their tax. Items that are mass produced by machines using low skilled operators might not be significantly impacted by tax.charlie said:. . .You probably won't believe that so please point me to a
reference that rebuts that estimate. I would truly like to study a
contrary report.
. . .
Charlie, those are the numbers from my records and my tax returns for those years. As for the car purchase, it is difficult to compute the exact impact on my annual expense rate. The reason it does not add much (if any) is because I compute my budgets with and without infrequent purchases, then average the cost of those infrequent purchases over all 9 years that I've kept accurate records. DW and I plan to spend money on computers, house maintenance, foriegn travel, car purchase, etc. on an infrequent basis. On years we don't buy a new car, we pay for a trip to Egypt or Peru, etc. Since I've only had one full year in retirement to look at, I'm not sure what to consider average yet. My spending in 2003 was actually the anomolous year in spending. DW and I cut way back the latter half of that year as we entered retirement. We were a little bit nervous about giving up salary and we were far too conservative. It took awhile before we became comfortable spending as much money as we now do on travel.charlie said:. . .
Your post #74 on page 5 is disingenuous at best. You not only make
errors in the fair tax calculation but you use a year in which you
bought a new car to claim that you are getting screwed by $9000
per year. You should do a re-calculation using an average annual
expenditure and don't forget the prebate of $4283 you would receive
annually under the fair tax system to draw your conclusion.
. . .