PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Tax Debates
     National Sales Tax

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
admin

|      |       Report Post



Administrator
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

IS THE  NATIONAL SALES TAX THE FAIREST PLAN?

http://www.youdebate.com/DEBATES/TAX_NATIONAL_SALES.HTM

(Edited by admin 10/8/2002 at 7:04 PM).
 


Posts: 31 | Posted: 11:19 AM on May 2, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The 23% rate is ver misleading.  The calculations are made as follows.  If one spends $100 dollars on a taxable item and pays $30 in tax, the $30 is 23% of the total.  
This is really a 30% tax rate and not the 23% as they claim.  

 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 9:49 PM on September 13, 2002 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

This is the least practical tax that sounds real.  The poor pay much more of their income on this tax and end up paying much more of the taxes as a percentage of their income.  It would be the same as having the poor pay a 25% tax rate and the top one percent pay a 2% tax rate.  
I hope this provides some light on the regressive nature of state taxes.  The poor pay a much higher percentage of their income to state sales taxes than richer people.
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 9:51 PM on September 13, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

no.  Due away with all taxes.  THey are stupid and just give money to the government.  Dont they have enough already???


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 4:15 PM on September 25, 2002 | IP
tsmith2771

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Actually no they don't, we are in a multi-trillion dollar debt.  If there was no "evil" government do you realize what would happen.


-------
"I have no interest in making blacks equal to whites, they are of a lesser quality and this I am sure of." -Abraham Lincoln
"You don't win a war by dying for your country, you win a war by making the other person die for theirs." -General George Patton
 


Posts: 372 | Posted: 6:55 PM on September 25, 2002 | IP
Exxoss

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

yes, we'd be a communist society with no government.  And i'd rule the world.


-------
I am Exxoss, come to save you all from your impending doom!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

-Exxoss
 


Posts: 438 | Posted: 10:22 AM on September 26, 2002 | IP
locagirl

|      |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

i dont want u to rule the world, that would be bad
 


Posts: 60 | Posted: 2:10 PM on November 9, 2002 | IP
Patriotandproudofit

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The US gov't is some 6.1 tril. in debt, and why? Because they are invloved in sooo many things outside of their Constitutional powers that they don't know how to control their spending.

Solution: Have a flexible national sales tax that can adjust to the times, and get the gov't back within the limits of the Const.

May God have mercy on us!


-------
Are you a man of the times, or a man for the times?
 


Posts: 51 | Posted: 12:24 AM on December 31, 2002 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

nat'l sales tax unfairly targets the poor. And while the govt. is a bit...flexible when deciding what it can and cant do, under the court interpretations of the interstate commerce clause and the necessary and proper clause (and the constitutional amendment allowing an income tax), it is within its constitutional powers.


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 2:19 PM on December 31, 2002 | IP
Patriotandproudofit

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Note: I am not saying that I completely support a national sales tax. I truly hope to see the Flat (head, general, or whatever name you use) Tax used as the main source of gov't income from the American people. This would, of course, require the repealing of the 16th Amend. and that will be no small chore!


-------
Are you a man of the times, or a man for the times?
 


Posts: 51 | Posted: 01:26 AM on January 1, 2003 | IP
dsadevil

|       |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

flat tax is just as bad. progressive taxes all the way!


-------
"If stupidity got us into this mess, why can't it get us out?" -Will Rodgers<br><br><br>"Neither man nor nation can prosper unless in looking at the present, thought is steadily taken for the future." -T. Roosevelt<br><br>"Might I remind you that extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice, is no virtue." -Barry Goldwater<br><br>

Respect through Excellence only
 


Posts: 789 | Posted: 4:07 PM on January 1, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

To patriotandproudofit:
We do have tremendous debt but it is not from our intrest overseas it is from foriegn manipulation right here at home. The Federal Reserve Bank is a privately owned bank started at the beginning of the century to control the smaller banks and the money supply in the country. this debt is designed to never be paid completly off.

1.6 trillion dollars a year collected in taxes and "all is dedicated to paying the interest on the national debt, not one nickle goes to the services that people think they pay for".
The Croasum report, commisioned by Ronald Reagan.
If the government cared about the people they would print thier own money in the form of silver certificates and eliminate need to pay intrest at all. This is also unconstitutional but certainly less repugnant to it.

The powers that be are entrenched and will never surrender it. They will lead us to world socialism which is already well underway. Socialism is repugnant to the Constitution and personel freedom and liberty.

The taxation issues with this country start with the Federal Reserve Bank. It is a mechanism to fractional banking to remove money from ciculation and keep inflation down.they are doing a poor job of it!

"we cannot be ignorant and free" T. Jefferson.

Yours in Liberty
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 4:00 PM on March 15, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

poor people would not pay any taxes at all under the sales tax pln because of the rebate that would be given to every family covering the cost of sales taxes on all purchases up to the poverty level
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 3:11 PM on August 7, 2003 | IP
Guest

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

those who are worried about the poor being overtsaxed have not read te bill. the one GREAT thing is that it does away  with the IRS
 


Posts: 0 | Posted: 6:21 PM on February 1, 2004 | IP
rohinimohan

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Nobody seems to be discussing the NST's effect on the underground economy. Levying tax on consumption does nothing to track illegal or unrecorded activities in the country.
For example, if an electrician does work for some customer and earns unrecorded income, he might have to pay tax on anything he spends it on. but the customer who availed the services will still be able to evade the purchase tax on the service he has got from any underground electrician. So, one of them pays tax and the other is still able to escape it.
NST, i feel, doesn't affect the size of the black market much. Then, people are just going to resort to more and more black transactions.
What is the remedy?


-------
Rohini Mohan
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 07:58 AM on February 16, 2004 | IP
ss20man

|       |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I do not understand how the poor would be paying more taxes then the rich under the NST. What diff does it make if they pay a bigger PERSENT of their INCOME? A rich person spends much more in a month then a poor person. I just don’t get it. We shouldn’t they paid the same price for the government?

Family “P” make 2000$ a month spends 1500$ a month 1500 *23% =450&+/-
Family “R” makes 16,660 a month spends 10,000$ a month 10,000 * 23%=3,000$+/-

 


Posts: 5 | Posted: 5:16 PM on November 9, 2004 | IP
Cre8ivE

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Cathing up on various threads in this discussion
Poor paying more than the rich: regardless of the rebates (loopholes) in the proposed plan, should we care if the "poor pay more than the rich"?
First off, this  typically liberal appeal to the 'heart on their sleeves' populace, does nothing for the debate as regards the National Sales Tax (NST) being a good or bad plan.  There are too many factors that place a person in the position of being 'poor' that it is - in itself - a topic of discussion and not particularily relavant to the virutes (or lack thereof) to the NST.
Secondly, socialistic and communistic policy is "taxed according to their means, entitled according to their needs"...the democratic Republic that we were founded as depended on the individual, in this case "save by consuming less"
Lastly, as "the poor pay more than the rich" is an appeal to "take care of" the needy, I can guarantee that if I had the extra $30,000 per year in my pocket I would be able to support the LOCAL people who need assistance, without the government agency overhead costs. (see topics related to how "poor/homeless - ness" is a local issue, which when resolved locally solves the 'national' issue...)

An Underground economy:  This exists currently, and likely will continue to exist under any schema.  The thing that gets missed, in most discussions realting to the NST, is that it is easy to see how a purchaser of underground goods/service MAY 'avoid' taxes under our current system (because the provider does not pay tax on the $$), whereas the purchaser would not be able to avoid it under the NST system.  ALL businesses- underground as well - pass on the cost of doing business to the consumer.  Thus, in a NST system, the consumer would be paying a slightly higher price - even for underground goods/service - as a result.  This would in fact INCREASE the revenues under a NST system compared to the current IRS system, as the black market would be affected much more than it is now.

New Topic:: Property Taxes.  Would these go away as well?  I am still confused why we as a society (ok most of the Liberals out there.. the rest of us have figured this out) feel it is OK to take away a persons's property (that they have paid for) if they fail to pay a tax (feudal tenure in this case) on it?  With the National Sales tax, particualrily if this tax was on the one time event (purchase) of the house - whether paid over time or lump sum - would mitigate the need for the property tax as well.  And Grandma & Grandpa (a good portion of the "poor" out there!) would not have to be faced with losing their homes (adding "homeless" to their "poor" status) after they had paid the (one time) tax.  All the strings that tie property taxes to local 'systems and service" are A) ridiculous: bill for the items as people partake of the system/service, and B) moot: if such systems were moved off the govt dole and placed back in a competitive public environment.   Replacing the current property tax system with the NST system, would also encourage people to improve their residences without fear of losing the equity generated to the ever growing (property) tax.  This would potentially provide a means for inner cities to be improved without incurring the dis-incentive of an increase in property tax.
Additionally, look at Nevada's and North Dakota's definition of 'allodial property', and their allowance for INDIVIDUALS to obtain said title to their land.

I could go on forever... but I leave my initiation at this - and I'll be back later...
 


Posts: 4 | Posted: 12:30 PM on November 18, 2004 | IP
enaid

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I believe the Nat. Sales Tax is not correct.  We who plan on building a home for retirement would (on an avg $200,000 home) have to pay  an extra $46,000 in Sales Tax.  They say we can finance it over the years of the mortgage, but that results in additional interest charged for the loan.  
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 1:02 PM on November 19, 2004 | IP
SuperCow

|      |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The current income tax system is far more regressive than the proposed national sales tax.  Those of you proclaiming progressive taxes would probably be surprised that Teresa Kerry and Donald Trump both pay a lower effective income tax rate than you do.

Personally, I am in support of the proposed NST even if the rate turned out to be 50 or 60% because it is more fair and progressive than income taxes.  (Provided of course, that the excess pays down the debt) The tax would greatly reduce the special interest lobbying and tax loopholes that can be exploited only by the extremely wealthy.  It would gain income from those currently making money illegally.  The tax prebate proposal makes the system more progressive in that very poor will essentially pay no tax, and those slightly above pay very little.

I suggest everyone who likes the idea to register their support:

http://www.fairtax.org

 


Posts: 2 | Posted: 12:30 PM on November 30, 2004 | IP
SuperCow

|      |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

New Topic:: Property Taxes.  Would these go away as well?  I am still confused why we as a society (ok most of the Liberals out there.. the rest of us have figured this out) feel it is OK to take away a persons's property (that they have paid for) if they fail to pay a tax (feudal tenure in this case) on it?  With the National Sales tax, particualrily if this tax was on the one time event (purchase) of the house - whether paid over time or lump sum - would mitigate the need for the property tax as well.  And Grandma & Grandpa (a good portion of the "poor" out there!) would not have to be faced with losing their homes (adding "homeless" to their "poor" status) after they had paid the (one time) tax.  All the strings that tie property taxes to local 'systems and service" are A) ridiculous: bill for the items as people partake of the system/service, and B) moot: if such systems were moved off the govt dole and placed back in a competitive public environment.   Replacing the current property tax system with the NST system, would also encourage people to improve their residences without fear of losing the equity generated to the ever growing (property) tax.  This would potentially provide a means for inner cities to be improved without incurring the dis-incentive of an increase in property tax.
Additionally, look at Nevada's and North Dakota's definition of 'allodial property', and their allowance for INDIVIDUALS to obtain said title to their land.

I could go on forever... but I leave my initiation at this - and I'll be back later...


Property taxes and their rates are decided and collected through your local state or county government, and don't fall under federal jurisdiction.  Nothing the state does would change.  (Except the state income tax forms being changed slightly to allow for no federal returns.)
 


Posts: 2 | Posted: 12:38 PM on November 30, 2004 | IP
guardians

|      |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I am definately FOR the National Retail Sales Tax, or Fair Tax as it is known.  There is a misconception that it places an unfair burden on the poor, but I disagree. There is a rebate system included in the plan that rebates the taxes for the basic necessities of life, dependant on family size.  Plus, since used items are not taxed, if you are a bargain shopper like me, it is concievable that you could actually come out ahead by buying used goods.  (Can you imagine what kind of business Flea Markets would do???)   More importantly, those illegally earning their livings tax-free now would pay their fair share for a change.  Lastly, the US would become a mecca for foreign investors and the $16 trillion in offshore accounts could come home if income tax penalties were removed.  Sounds like a win-win-win to me!



-------
Guardians
Thomson, GA
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 01:02 AM on December 9, 2004 | IP
cvrtchnl150

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

How will the FairTax handle transactions in the equity world?  Will purchases of stocks, bonds etc. be taxed?  Will brokers, financial planners/advisors tax their services?

These would be the people most likely to be able to afford the tax.  I haven't read anything about the tax imposed here.  I'm sure there are other areas that haven't been explored.
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 3:03 PM on January 22, 2005 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.