It would replace the income tax with a national sales tax, so yes, in states with sales tax, items would be very expensive
Is Obama going to call Mccain on his crap?
- Thread starter TheMontashu
- Start date
This has been covered before but the "fair tax" is a pipe dream and not because it's politically untenable. It's economically impossible and enforcing it would require a tremendous change in government org almost to the point of a police state.
Obama's tax plan is not as redistributionist as it's panned to be. It's simply relative to Bush's tax cuts (which targeted the rich) and McCain's additional tax cuts (which target the rich) that it looks like he's targeting the rich. You won't see an exodus on a mass scale. Current flight is occuring because of the rising national debt... the increased tax revenues and a budget surplus would start to reverse that trend which will help keep investment in-country despite the increased taxation.
What we badly need is to keep the economic engine moving, which means consumer spending, which means money in the pockets of people without capital. Ergo, Obama's plan.
I see what the graph is trying to do, but my questions is with that graph laid out along a time line, have those numbers been adjusted to inflation and overall value of the dollar when comparing debt levels to any debt level in the past. It has to have some normalization, by data analysis standards.
The point is even with the debt fixed for inflation, the pattern in spending remains.
in my period of middle class "decimation" under both bush terms, i have managed to save &/| invest 15% & give another 15% to charity.
my debt (house/car) is almost gone. yes, there are real people w/ real money problems, and at the risk of being offensive, i have to say a large chunk of their problems are self-induced. the last thing we need is an enabling gov't, it won't fix our consumerist culture.
just so you don't think it's about me, let me offer more anecdotal evidence from middle class america which are irrespective of religious beliefs, party affiliation, and family size: as a rule, those who have (& stick to) a budget, save for big ticket items, and set aside money for charity are financially secure for both now & the future.
above all else, they don't get sucked into this vortex of $50 gifts for the monthly random b-day party for their kids' friends. sheesh.
i see what it's trying to suggest, but wouldn't it be more accurate if it were in terms of gdp & other relevant & related figures, most notably the fact that carter & clinton were serving during peace time?
war's a helluva drug
C
curtix
Guest
Hey can your source this. I am really curious about it. Ear Marks Suck.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iE2JCSH5p9r2GBkQWS9TWAMzmuvQD9346GNO0
Stinkle, anecdotal evidence really isn't too valid when we are talking about a nationwide issue.
C
curtix
Guest
Thank you sir.
if it's good enough for the campaign stump, it's good enough for rm
On the other hand, the campaigns aren't about nationwide issues
