A "FAIR TAX" thread so U_D can "tear me to shreds..."

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Then you just made the case (pay attention Throb) that the FairTax does indeed replace the current tax.

I think the plan makes it plainly clear that we all pay less in taxes because more of us will be sharing the load.

Here's the type of inequity that it also prevents against the "middle-class."

You spend all your life not rich, squirreling your money away, investing in your home, your 401K, maybe a little stock, and then, finally, you reach that magic goal: retirement. All this time, you've been taxed out the wazoo to pay for the benefits of yoohoo's...

Now it's time to sell your home, travel, or relocate to Florida, but then you discover, suddenly, for one year, you're "the rich" and you get taxed accordingly. And the insult to the injury is that the yoohoo's let out a might yahoo!

It's time for the yoohoos to start getting some skin in the game.

 

[firespin]

Then you just made the case (pay attention Throb) that the FairTax does indeed replace the current tax.

I think the plan makes it plainly clear that we all pay less in taxes because more of us will be sharing the load.

Here's the type of inequity that it also prevents against the "middle-class."

You spend all your life not rich, squirreling your money away, investing in your home, your 401K, maybe a little stock, and then, finally, you reach that magic goal: retirement. All this time, you've been taxed out the wazoo to pay for the benefits of yoohoo's...

Now it's time to sell your home, travel, or relocate to Florida, but then you discover, suddenly, for one year, you're "the rich" and you get taxed accordingly. And the insult to the injury is that the yoohoo's let out a might yahoo!

It's time for the yoohoos to start getting some skin in the game.

What are you yammering about now?

You ignored Rob's clearly worded challenge to you. Hide much?

Speaking of the retired--elderly people who have little income but live off assets previously taxed would (under the Fair Tax) be taxed again on their consumption, with no prebate for the part above the poverty level.

Today, the first $250,000 profits from the sale of a primary residence ($500,000 for couple) is not subject to tax. And, of course, the interest paid on the home mortgage to pay for that house was deductible for those who could itemize. Just a few of the many little intricacies of the current tax system...and we know that all of those things are inherently evil. There's a whole chapter about it in a book, even.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Okay AJ, Let's try this another way.

Assume:
1) The FairTax has passed and is the law of the land.
2) You walk into Walmart to buy a candy bar
3) The price of the candy bar is $1.00 + sales tax.

Tell us:
A) How much did you pay out-of-pocket for that candy bar?
B) What was the sales tax rate?

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

There are TWO sales tax rates depending on how you want to look at it.

If it's The Fair Tax rate, it's .23 cents which you will now PROVE is a 30% tax. We, Ishmael and I, covered that topic in detail and you are either honestly stupid or purposely stupid in making your "point."



And let's get back to your "massive" bureaucracy to write checks and track people. Hey, Throb, it's not the 1950's, it's an electronic society..., money is mover electronically by computer.



And Firespin, let's go back to that "irresponsible" remark. You know what's irresponsible? Setting back, let the experts and the press fuel an epidemic based on bad Science and "demand" government get involved and to not ask questions while the "experts" take the failed cancer drug AZT and poison thousands of throw-away gay people and never be called to account for it...

Thank Gawd Glow Ball Warning was only trying to "cure" the world economies.

Cynicism, skepticism, and healthy questioning should be consistent. You've spent more time thinking about a tax scheme that cannot be enacted as long as we govern by hate and emotion than you ever thought about a topic that's an actual life-and-death matter. You just accepted the word of government and the "experts" it decided had a consensus and "settled" Science. Well, as you know, I'm no big fan of Consensus or self-declared "settled" Science. I think it's YOU who are closer to irresponsible than me.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

What are you yammering about now?

You ignored Rob's clearly worded challenge to you. Hide much?

Speaking of the retired--elderly people who have little income but live off assets previously taxed would (under the Fair Tax) be taxed again on their consumption, with no prebate for the part above the poverty level.

Today, the first $250,000 profits from the sale of a primary residence ($500,000 for couple) is not subject to tax. And, of course, the interest paid on the home mortgage to pay for that house was deductible for those who could itemize. Just a few of the many little intricacies of the current tax system...and we know that all of those things are inherently evil. There's a whole chapter about it in a book, even.

Speaking of, ALREADY ADDRESSED THAT ISSUE the first time it was flung at the wall...

When first it fails to stick,
Fling, fling again!

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Just to be perfectly clear...

THEY'RE ALREADY PAYING IT!

AT LEAST UNDER THE FAIRTAX, THEY GET SOME RELIEF!​

 

[firespin]

OK, so this is either unresponsive or wrong...if you are saying that the tax is 23 cents and the transaction is $1.23, it doesn't meet the legal requirement to collect 23% of the transaction as tax. But you persist in denying that.

There are TWO sales tax rates depending on how you want to look at it.

If it's The Fair Tax rate, it's .23 cents which you will now PROVE is a 30% tax. We, Ishmael and I, covered that topic in detail and you are either honestly stupid or purposely stupid in making your "point."

So, is denial a consistent approach for you? Let's look at this:

And Firespin, let's go back to that "irresponsible" remark. You know what's irresponsible? Setting back, let the experts and the press fuel an epidemic based on bad Science and "demand" government get involved and to not ask questions while the "experts" take the failed cancer drug AZT and poison thousands of throw-away gay people and never be called to account for it...

Thank Gawd Glow Ball Warning was only trying to "cure" the world economies.

Cynicism, skepticism, and healthy questioning should be consistent. You've spent more time thinking about a tax scheme that cannot be enacted as long as we govern by hate and emotion than you ever thought about a topic that's an actual life-and-death matter. You just accepted the word of government and the "experts" it decided had a consensus and "settled" Science. Well, as you know, I'm no big fan of Consensus or self-declared "settled" Science. I think it's YOU who are closer to irresponsible than me.

AGW, H1N1 and the Fair Tax are / were hypothetical examples backed up by models. It's right to be skeptical of these, and to look for proof.

HIV/AIDS is proven now. You give somebody HIV-tainted blood, many die of AIDs, independent of lifestyle or AZT. Simple fact. If you were to suggest the Red Cross is withholding perfectly good blood by screening for HIV< or if you were OK to give your family members HIV-tainted transfusions, you would be killing people in the name of ignorance. And that's irresponsible.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

AIDS is proven...





HIV could be a coincidence. Take Magic Johnson for example...

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Firespin.




It's 23 cents. Period. 100*.23

It's a 23% tax.



You add the word rate and act like it's Magic...

 

[firespin]

AIDS is proven...

HIV could be a coincidence. Take Magic Johnson for example...

Denial by anecdote. How nice.

Now tell us how many AIDS patients are HIV-negative.

Firespin.

It's 23 cents. Period. 100*.23

It's a 23% tax.

You add the word rate and act like it's Magic...

How much does our $1.00 candy bar cost with tax? (I understand the number is different for a 77 cent candy bar, by the way.)

We need to understand the cost of the candy bar vs. the cost of the tax because many states will also have sales taxes, and you don't want to pay state sales tax on a federal tax.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Okay AJ, Let's try this another way.

Assume:
1) The FairTax has passed and is the law of the land.
2) You walk into Walmart to buy a candy bar
3) The price of the candy bar is $1.00 + sales tax.

Tell us:
A) How much did you pay out-of-pocket for that candy bar?
B) What was the sales tax rate?

There are TWO sales tax rates depending on how you want to look at it.

If it's The Fair Tax rate, it's .23 cents which you will now PROVE is a 30% tax. We, Ishmael and I, covered that topic in detail and you are either honestly stupid or purposely stupid in making your "point."

<babblesnip>

How much did you pay out-of-pocket for that candy bar, AJ?

Tell us.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

A lot of them. The problem is (well, two problems, one was the UN faking data in third-world countries), the other is that when people die from lifestyle choices (or even pneumonia) we count their deaths in two ways, one if they are HIV positive, and one if they are.

Have you read, or studied ANY opposition research or are you willing to blindly accept, say, Man-made CO2 as THE cause of global warming?

...

I just told you, it costs 1.23 at which point Throb will jump up and claim as an "exclusive" tax, it's a 30% tax rate...

YOU ALREADY PAY A STATE SALES TAX ON FEDERAL TAXES...

YOU ALREADY PAY THE 23%! You just down see it and in that way, it doesn't anger you...

But, you should be pissed.

Pissed as hell...

 

[RobDownSouth]

A lot of them. The problem is (well, two problems, one was the UN faking data in third-world countries), the other is that when people die from lifestyle choices (or even pneumonia) we count their deaths in two ways, one if they are HIV positive, and one if they are.

Have you read, or studied ANY opposition research or are you willing to blindly accept, say, Man-made CO2 as THE cause of global warming?

...

I just told you, it costs 1.23 at which point Throb will jump up and claim as an "exclusive" tax, it's a 30% tax rate...

YOU ALREADY PAY A STATE SALES TAX ON FEDERAL TAXES...

YOU ALREADY PAY THE 23%! You just down see it and in that way, it doesn't anger you...

But, you should be pissed.

Pissed as hell...

Non-sequiturs aside, how much did you pay out-of-pocket for that candy bar, AJ?

Hmmmm?
Tell us.

 

[Saint Peter]

You fuckers are boring.

 

[JohnnySavage]

You fuckers are boring.

Tempers are starting to flair.

 

[RobDownSouth]

You fuckers are boring.

au contraire. Watching AJ spin and gyrate to avoid answering unpleasant questions is quite amusing.

Pete, since AJ can't or won't answer my question, how much do YOU think he paid out-of-pocket for a $1.00 candy bar if the FairTax were somehow passed?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Tempers are starting to flair.

Johnny, since AJ can't or won't answer my question, how much do YOU think he paid out-of-pocket for a $1.00 candy bar if the FairTax were somehow passed?

 

[Saint Peter]

au contraire. Watching AJ spin and gyrate to avoid answering unpleasant questions is quite amusing.

Pete, since AJ can't or won't answer my question, how much do YOU think he paid out-of-pocket for a $1.00 candy bar if the FairTax were somehow passed?

He is a cheapass and would go without.

Pete, however, in Denver, where we are not at all shy about taxing stuff, thinks that 1.00 candy bar would cost about a buck thrity. The state could give two fucks about the fed tax and their 7 or 8 cents would come out of my pocket.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Johnny, since AJ can't or won't answer my question, how much do YOU think he paid out-of-pocket for a $1.00 candy bar if the FairTax were somehow passed?

I don't know. I still have a flaired temper because gas is sold in 9/10ths of a penny. It's just wrong.

 

[Saint Peter]

I don't know. I still have a flaired temper because gas is sold in 9/10ths of a penny. It's just wrong.

I say it is time to free ourselves from pain in the ass pennies. Nickels and dimes, too.

 

[firespin]

My son would like the "AJ school of healthcare research". He might conclude that unprotected sex wasn't a major cause of pregnancy...it's just a coincidence. Why, you ask? That seems to be a crazy thought process.

Well, that's pejorative, and assumes crazy is bad. But that aside:

Pregnancy is actually caused by environmental factors, including short skirts and high heels. That's why it affects young women, and not (say) men, or older women.

The whole "sex causes pregnancy" thing is a myth perpetrated by puritans who don't want young men to have a good time. People have sex all the time and plenty of times, there's no pregnancy. And of course artificial insemination proves that sex cannot be the primary risk factor.

And for those who want to pursue some crazy "egg and sperm" scenario, then how do you explain Jesus, hmmmmm? I thought so. Point and match.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Non-sequiturs aside, how much did you pay out-of-pocket for that candy bar, AJ?

Hmmmm?
Tell us.

Well, if it was $1.00 under the current embedded taxes, and then the Fairtax were passed, I would pay $0.97 out of pocket.

And you hate that because micro-economically you collect less money and if you actually put a price floor in and got $1 for that candy bar, then it would be a 30% tax, or better yet, you want to pretend that the candy bar's price remains $1.00 and THEN you get to pay an additional tax so you'd be out another 23 cents...

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

My son would like the "AJ school of healthcare research". He might conclude that unprotected sex wasn't a major cause of pregnancy...it's just a coincidence. Why, you ask? That seems to be a crazy thought process.

Well, that's pejorative, and assumes crazy is bad. But that aside:

Pregnancy is actually caused by environmental factors, including short skirts and high heels. That's why it affects young women, and not (say) men, or older women.

The whole "sex causes pregnancy" thing is a myth perpetrated by puritans who don't want young men to have a good time. People have sex all the time and plenty of times, there's no pregnancy. And of course artificial insemination proves that sex cannot be the primary risk factor.

And for those who want to pursue some crazy "egg and sperm" scenario, then how do you explain Jesus, hmmmmm? I thought so. Point and match.

That's an ad hominem attack like when we "deniers" tried to point out the fallacies of the Glow Ball Warning hoax and were labeled "flat earthers."

Do you like Throb's gutter, or what?

 

[Saint Peter]

My son would like the "AJ school of healthcare research". He might conclude that unprotected sex wasn't a major cause of pregnancy...it's just a coincidence. Why, you ask? That seems to be a crazy thought process.

Well, that's pejorative, and assumes crazy is bad. But that aside:

Pregnancy is actually caused by environmental factors, including short skirts and high heels. That's why it affects young women, and not (say) men, or older women.

The whole "sex causes pregnancy" thing is a myth perpetrated by puritans who don't want young men to have a good time. People have sex all the time and plenty of times, there's no pregnancy. And of course artificial insemination proves that sex cannot be the primary risk factor.

And for those who want to pursue some crazy "egg and sperm" scenario, then how do you explain Jesus, hmmmmm? I thought so. Point and match.

I like where you are going with this.

Do skinny jean increase the chances of pregnancy because that shit looks so good I must tap it, or do skinny jeans lower blood circulation and in turn lower the chances of getting knockered up?

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

That's Catholic school skirts DUMMY!!!