PDA

View Full Version : HERMAN CAIN ignores our Constitution in supporting the alleged fair tax,(H.R.25)!




johnwk
08-01-2010, 07:39 PM
When will “conservatives” realize the alleged “fair tax” was created by Washington Establishment insiders to advance the progressive agenda?


When will conservatives who promote the alleged “fair tax” realize it is not designed to put an end to taxes calculated from profits, gains, and other “incomes”?


And when will those who panhandle the alleged fair tax recommend to people interested in the idea to read the actual text of the legislation (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.25:..) instead of its fairytale version put into book form by Neal Boortz?


When will those who panhandle the alleged fair tax be forthright and explain that it is designed to put every American Family on the public dole and make the majority of voters in America dependent upon a monthly government check?


When will those who panhandle the alleged fair tax make it known that although it is sold as closing down the IRS, the alleged fair tax would create two new tax collecting agencies, the “Excise Tax Bureau” and a “Sales Tax Bureau”, not to mention keeping the “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms” collection agencies alive so we wind up with three tax collecting agencies to harass the people in the collection of taxes?


And why doesn’t Herman Cain who promotes the evil and alleged fair tax, be up front in saying its “family consumption” entitlement would make it America’s largest entitlement program as documented in the President’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform (http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/taxreformpanel/final-report/TaxPanel_8-9.pdf) who wrote in crystal clear language:


Conclusion


“Like other consumption taxes, the full replacement retail sales tax has pro-retail growth features. Nevertheless, the Panel does not recommend a full replacement retail sales tax. Without a large cash grant program to ease the burden of the tax, a retail sales tax would not be appropriately progressive. A cash grant program to make the tax appropriately progressive would cost at least $600 billion per year – which would make it America’s largest entitlement program. The Panel concluded that it was inappropriate to recommend a tax reform proposal that required the federal government to collect and redistribute this amount in additional revenue from taxpayers. The Panel also was concerned with administrative and compliance issues associated with a retail sales tax, as well as difficulties involving coordination with existing state sales taxes.”


If Herman really believes in the stated goals of the alleged fair tax, [ending taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries, and other incomes, and, closing down the IRS without creating any new tax collecting agencies] then why not simply work to add the following 32 words to our Constitution which would accomplish all that and bring us back to our founding father’s original tax plan (http://townshipnews.org/?p=1360) which helped to pave the way for America to become the economic marvel of the world?


The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money


Please Mr. Cain, do not fall for the progressive and alleged fair tax! Let us work to establish real tax reform by adding the above words to our Constitution.


Regards,
JWK


If we can make the majority of America’s families dependent upon a federal government check, [the alleged fair tax’s family consumption allowance] we can then bribe them for their vote, keep ourselves in power and keep the remaining portion of America’s working population enslaved to pay the bills___Our Washington Establishment’s Marxist game plan, a plan to establish a federal plantation and redistribute the bread which America’s labor and business has earned.

CryLibertyOrDeath
08-01-2010, 07:42 PM
I think a sales tax is better than the income tax for one simple reason: it encourages saving. Saving encourages investment/ownership. Ownership destroys the machine.

johnwk
08-02-2010, 06:06 AM
I think a sales tax is better than the income tax for one simple reason: it encourages saving. Saving encourages investment/ownership. Ownership destroys the machine.


A national sales tax violates the rule of apportionment! What is wrong with our Founding Father's original tax plan?

JWK

Elwar
08-02-2010, 06:38 AM
The FairTax plan has a loophole that allows a government agency to decide how much money every American citizen gets every month as a tax rebate.

Elwar
08-02-2010, 06:50 AM
Ron Paul has said that if it were to come up for a vote, he would support the FairTax. Though he supports an elimination of the income tax.

erowe1
08-02-2010, 09:44 AM
The FairTax plan has a loophole that allows a government agency to decide how much money every American citizen gets every month as a tax rebate.

It has another loophole in that it doesn't prevent the reinstitution of the income tax in addition to the sales tax. Sure, it includes a repeal of the 16th amendment, but you'd have to be crazy to think that Congress would hesitate to pass an income tax just because the 16th amendment isn't there any more.

johnwk
08-02-2010, 01:47 PM
.

In response to questions about the alleged fair tax being ‘regressive’ because it would tax the necessities of life (food, shelter, clothing, medical needs and procedures, etc.) Boortz, while on the air goes into a long winded recital of taxes which are currently embedded in everything we buy. He explains to his listen audience that one may not realize it but with everything you purchase there’s about 22 percent of taxes embedded in the products. He continues that taxes which are imposed upon corporations in the production of products are eventually passed on to the consumer in their selling price. But under the alleged fair tax Mr. Boortz proudly announces that these embedded taxes are eliminated, and in their place a new 23 percent tax is imposed upon the purchase of all new retail products and services.

Boortz then talks about an important feature of the alleged fair tax, which he asserts is never understood, especially by its critics and identifies the feature as a “prebate”. But the use of the word “prebate” is to disguise what is really being talked about. What Boortz is really referring to here is a monthly “Family Consumption Allowance” check from the federal government which is referred to in the text of the proposal legislation. Boortz then suggests this “prebate” is the part of the fairtax under which the basic necessities of life are untaxed.

But the truth is, the basic necessities of life, food, clothing, shelter, heating fuel, medical needs and supplies, etc., are all hit with the 23 percent tax! What the Family Consumption Allowance really is is a proposed monthly federal check to be sent out to every household in America, an entitlement, which is intended to be used to pay for the 23 percent tax upon a rationed supply of necessities. After the check is used up, the pain of the 23 percent tax on every necessity of life bought is immediately felt, and would be especially felt by many retirees and the poorest who live among us!

But there is something even more sinister about the “Family Consumption Allowance” which the critics of the alleged fair tax point out, and which Mr. Boortz cleverly avoids addressing heads up.

The family consumption allowance would in fact create a very dangerous and dependent voting constituency which would dwarf those who now receive a monthly Social Security check.


In 2009, each family of four under the alleged fair tax, if it were in force, would have received a monthly “Family Consumption Allowance” check of about $450-500 per month. It is reasonable to point out that a monthly entitlement check of $450-500 per month for a typical family of four with annual earnings of approximately $ 45-50K, is a significant amount of money and which our progressive gang on Capitol Hill would be happy to increase, but they must be elected or re-elected to do so, which is the bribery game plan they now engage in with other monthly entitlement handed outs.

This is how our progressive gang works. First they make a particular group dependent upon a monthly government check, such as the proposed Family Consumption Allowance, and then during election time they remind their captive and dependent voting block the gravy train and redistribution of wealth will come to a stop if they are not elected or re-elected to stop those “right wing heartless conservatives”.

I can just picture Maxzine Waters, Barney Frank, Sheila Jackson-Lee, John Conyers Henry Waxman and bucket-mouth Alan Grayson of Florida giving the following speech on the House Floor to stir up their dependent voting base:

How dare those who have imposed the fair tax on our nation’s poor, now refuse to increase the family consumption allowance to relieve the oppressive nature of this tax which taxes the food a mother buys to feed her child, taxes the clothing she purchases to cloth that child, taxes the fuel used to heat that child’s room during winter, taxes the medicine a mother needs to care for her sickly child, and then taxes the coffin used to bury her child because she could not afford the taxes imposed upon the necessities of life under.

Is this what Mr. Boortz and the architects of the “progressive” fair tax really want to create? A massive and devastating voting constituency dependent upon government for its subsistence who can be easily manipulated during election time to keep our progressive domestic enemies (http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?ContentID=166&ParentID=0&SectionID=4&SectionTree=4&lnk=b&ItemID=164) in power?


I hope Ron Paul does not support this progressive crap!


JWK

If we can make the majority of America’s families dependent upon a federal government check, [the alleged fair tax’s family consumption allowance] we can then bribe them for their vote, keep ourselves in power and keep the remaining portion of America’s working population enslaved to pay the bills ___Our Washington Establishment’s Marxist game plan, a plan to establish a federal plantation and redistribute the bread which America’s labor and business has earned.

johnwk
08-03-2010, 07:02 AM
One of the things that really ticks me off about the alleged fair tax is, Mary and Joe Sixpack, ordinary working people, if they dare to sell the property they have in their labor e.g., Joe cutting other people’s lawns on weekends to earn extra money, cannot do so under the alleged fair tax unless they register with government as a seller, collect taxes for the federal government, must keep any records the feds may dream up, will be subject to audits and must file fair tax returns under the penalty of perjury, which is exactly what we now have!


Here are some specific provisions from the text of H.R.25


SEC. 101. IMPOSITION OF SALES TAX.


`(a) In General- There is hereby imposed a tax on the use or consumption in the United States of taxable property or services.


`(d) Liability for Tax-


`(1) IN GENERAL- The person using or consuming taxable property or services in the United States is liable for the tax imposed by this section, except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection.


`(2) EXCEPTION WHERE TAX PAID TO SELLER-A person using or consuming a taxable property or service in the United States is not liable for the tax imposed by this section if the person pays the tax to a person selling the taxable property or service and receives from such person a purchaser's receipt within the meaning of section 510.


`(f) Barter Transactions- If gross payment for taxable property or services is made in other than money, then the person responsible for collecting and remitting the tax shall remit the tax to the sales tax administering authority in money as if gross payment had been made in money at the tax inclusive fair market value of the taxable property or services purchased


`(a) In General- Any person liable to collect and remit taxes pursuant to section 103(a) who is engaged in a trade or business shall register as a seller with the sales tax administering authority administering the taxes imposed by this subtitle.


`(e) Effect of Failure To Register- Any person that is required to register and who fails to do so is prohibited from selling taxable property or services The Secretary or a sales tax administering authority may bring an action seeking a temporary restraining order, an injunction, or such other order as may be appropriate to enforce this section.


So, when has Neal Boortz or Herman Cain informed their audiences of the above requirements under their alleged fair tax?


JWK

cindy25
08-03-2010, 07:12 AM
a protective tariff would be easier to administer. and is constitutionally sound