Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

I did a quick search to make sure this hadn't been talked about and saw it really hadden't.

What is your take on the "Fair Tax" system?

Like it.

I really like the idea, though I feel pretty confident in predicting it won't be getting enacted any time soon.

Would cause mass unemployment, not only for the IRS, but for all the tax accountants, attorneys, etc.

Besides, the uber rich and powerful have many avenues to evade paying taxes, and the burden currently falls upon the dying middle class.

That should give you enough info to surmise the date when any "flat" or "fair" tax law goes into effect.

Wedgebuster wrote:Would cause mass unemployment, not only for the IRS, but for all the tax accountants, attorneys, etc.

Besides, the uber rich and powerful have many avenues to evade paying taxes, and the burden currently falls upon the dying middle class.

That should give you enough info to surmise the date when any "flat" or "fair" tax law goes into effect.

So, we keep on keeping on? I don't think so. I also think your doom and gloom is not completely accurate. If it's done correctly, there won't be loopholes for the uber rich to take advantage of. The best part about this, is it allows you control your taxes. I don't know if it's the perfect answer (it probably isn't). But, neither is the "progressive" tax system we have thanks to the 16th amendment.

Wedgebuster wrote:Would cause mass unemployment, not only for the IRS, but for all the tax accountants, attorneys, etc.

Besides, the uber rich and powerful have many avenues to evade paying taxes, and the burden currently falls upon the dying middle class.

That should give you enough info to surmise the date when any "flat" or "fair" tax law goes into effect.

I disagree. The IRS will have to regear its staff to handle taxes coming in differently. The accountants, attorneys, etc. will have to do the same thing. Not saying that the same number of jobs will be needed in for taxing the population. It could require more or less.

We need to do what is best for the population of the country. If it causes job loss, maybe those jobs aren't needed and they will have to adapt to do something that will be more beneficial to society. That is how things work, and it will always be that way ... the rate we are going, we are on a straight course for repeating Rome's failures. We can't just keep robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Just sayin', it ain't gonna happen. Those who pull the strings will continue to do so, for their own benefit. It's money guys, money talks.

Congress has two major power platforms. One who gets the money and two who they take money from. Sadly, Congress is not going to give 1/2 of the power equation.


One thing I like about it is that instead of taking money from what people earn (taking people's money), tax collection would be a pass through. Retailers would collect and transmit the money to the government. Anyone who doesn't do this would not only be guilty of violating tax laws but would also be guilty of stealing. Penalties including jail would be easy to justify and should be harsh to avoid people collecting the money and keeping it.


Biggest problem would be the potential black market that would arise from a high consumption tax. But even that would be mitigated some as the black marketeers would eventually pay sales tax on items they bought from a legitimate source. One thing that does not occur now with under the table wages.

Wedgebuster wrote:Just sayin', it ain't gonna happen. Those who pull the strings will continue to do so, for their own benefit. It's money guys, money talks.

I can't argue with that.

Where's blueballs?

Danefan has been the only guy who has ever asked a question that gave me much pause about how good an idea the Fairtax is. I can't remember the question, but it was legit.

Just like Wedgie said, this won't get passed by "the powers that be" because they would be voting for themselves to no longer be "the powers that be".

It would be a way to tax those illegals....

bobbythekidd wrote:Danefan has been the only guy who has ever asked a question that gave me much pause about how good an idea the Fairtax is. I can't remember the question, but it was legit.

Just like Wedgie said, this won't get passed by "the powers that be" because they would be voting for themselves to no longer be "the powers that be".

Haha. I can't remember either.

clenz wrote:I did a quick search to make sure this hadn't been talked about and saw it really hadden't.

What is your take on the "Fair Tax" system?

It's a logical and equitable manner to ensure ALL pay for the privilege of living in this country without de-motivating people from working more nor businesses from hiring more workers. Due to these reasons, it will never be enacted by our fokked up government.

Wedgebuster wrote:Would cause mass unemployment, not only for the IRS, but for all the tax accountants, attorneys, etc.

Besides, the uber rich and powerful have many avenues to evade paying taxes, and the burden currently falls upon the dying middle class.

That should give you enough info to surmise the date when any "flat" or "fair" tax law goes into effect.

It wouldn't be a regressive tax, because goods and services with inelastic demand (like food, toiletries, etc.) would be taxed at a lower rate than other goods. Because these things make up a higher percentage of the poor's budget, they'd pay a smaller percentage of their money to the government.

Also, the super-rich can avoid the income tax a lot more easily than they can the current sales taxes, so why would it be easier for them with the fairtax?