The Great Fallacy of "Fiscally Conservative but For the Wars"

[OptionsTrader]

For those that you meet that claim they are "fiscally conservative but for the interventionist wars across the globe", be sure to state that fiscal conservatism requires a pro-peace posture, and here is why. Fiscal conservatism is only achievable if we begin to do the opposisite of what "conservatives" other than Ron Paul and most democratic candidates wish to do and drasticlly change the course of foreign wars, foreign assassinations, propping up foreign dictators, overthrowing elected governments, and building bases more than the existent 700 bases in 130 countries. If we do not pare back the military aggressiveness, it is going to bankrupt the people (ie fall of Roman empire), and the other things he/she may like about fiscal conservatism cannot be done with 10s of trillions of our treasure being wasted clinging to a world empire that makes us less safe and incites hatred.

Inform them that if they support "conservatives" other than Ron Paul, they are also supporting more of the same aggressive invasions that have lead to the quadrupling in the price of oil, making oil exporting countries rich. Heck, one of their government owned sovereign wealth funds bought 5% of Citigroup this week. Is that what the people of America want? To make oil producing nations richer, Americans poorer, and all the while inciting hatred around the entire world, and losing our businesses to foreign investors that are rich from our war's effect on their commodity and the dollar is worth less every day, making our companies weaker and easier to purchase? if this keeps up, we will have nothing but 700 vacant bases in the world, that Chinese anthropologists and archaeologists will be studying in the future.

(Last trade: oil ~ $88.71)

http://www.oilnergy.com/hpix/2obrentm.gif

And supporting the "conservatives" other than Ron Paul also means continuing the unaffordable cost of this foolish empire building visible in the on-going collapse of the dollar, making the fiscal conservative that is for the wars and his children feel poorer every day due to the inversely proportional effect on inflation of the money supply (excessive spending of borrowed money from countries like China) that this empire building has required, with a drop in the value of the dollar on the foreign exchange markets by around 38% since the beginning of Bush's neo-con "global war on terror" recent dollar price action in the market (note, the uSD index was at ~ 120 only 5 years ago) This is why the fiscal conservative that is for the wars feels poorer with the same or even more money, because the government stole his/her wealth indirectly and without asking.

http://i8.tinypic.com/6xgpb3s.png

M3 money supply (a statistic the Fed will no longer tell you, has to be derived independently):
http://www.nowandfutures.com/key_stats.html

http://www.nowandfutures.com/images/m3b_long_term.png

[NewEnd]

It was laughable in the debate ot hear Huckabee say he wanted to get rid of the IRS, but somehow keep up all our wars and bases around the world.

[quickmike]

It was laughable in the debate ot hear Huckabee say he wanted to get rid of the IRS, but somehow keep up all our wars and bases around the world.

Thats because he wants to charge us all a 26% "FAIR" tax on everything we buy instead. Oh yeah, he forgot to mention that didnt he?

That Chuck Norris must really be a dumb ass :D

Thats right Chuck, if youre reading this, I challenge you to a cage match. 2 men enter............. 1 man leave.:)

[AlexMerced]

how about Kane vs. Norris, our guy vs. their guy

[EvilEngineer]

Thats because he wants to charge us all a 26% "FAIR" tax on everything we buy instead. Oh yeah, he forgot to mention that didnt he?

That Chuck Norris must really be a dumb ass :D

Thats right Chuck, if youre reading this, I challenge you to a cage match. 2 men enter............. 1 man leave.:)

Yeah, I don't think people that are for the "fair tax" realize the shocking effect a 26% tax on things is going to look like. People will start seeing bread and milk for $4 - $6 and luxury goods jump up a huge amount. They will then start scaling back their spending... depressing the economy.

The problem with the income tax is that the majority of people, all though they know it's subtracted from their salary, they never know what it's like to have to write a check for taxes. When you start having to write checks to the government for a few thousand dollars... you start becoming VERY aware of it.

[quickmike]

Yeah, I don't think people that are for the "fair tax" realize the shocking effect a 26% tax on things is going to look like. People will start seeing bread and milk for $4 - $6 and luxury goods jump up a huge amount. They will then start scaling back their spending... depressing the economy.

The problem with the income tax is that the majority of people, all though they know it's subtracted from their salary, they never know what it's like to have to write a check for taxes. When you start having to write checks to the government for a few thousand dollars... you start becoming VERY aware of it.


Yep, im all too familiar with writing checks to the government, being self employed, and the same question runs through my mind every year.................

What the hell did the government do to earn it?

[Visual]

It's logically impossible to be fiscally conservative and pro war, when you spend 200 billion a year for the war in Iraq.

[OptionsTrader]

It's logically impossible to be fiscally conservative and pro war, when you spend 200 billion a year for the war in Iraq.

+1

Ergo the great fallacy.

[quickmike]

It's logically impossible to be fiscally conservative and pro war, when you spend 200 billion a year for the war in Iraq.

The US budget for Iraq in FY 2006 comes to $3,749 per Iraqi citizen.

Talk about a welfare problem!!!

[RonFan1776]

Yeah, I don't think people that are for the "fair tax" realize the shocking effect a 26% tax on things is going to look like. People will start seeing bread and milk for $4 - $6 and luxury goods jump up a huge amount. They will then start scaling back their spending... depressing the economy.

The problem with the income tax is that the majority of people, all though they know it's subtracted from their salary, they never know what it's like to have to write a check for taxes. When you start having to write checks to the government for a few thousand dollars... you start becoming VERY aware of it.

Especially when people figure out that the 26% is the tax-inclusive tax rate. ie- it's a 35.1% tax if you figure it like a every normal human being does.

26% tax-inclusive rate would be like paying $100 for a $74 item - $26 of tax on the $100 total = 26%, but the $26 on top of the item's price of $74 is actually a 35% federal tax rate.

Add on the extra 8-9% tax from most state/local govt's and you end up with something like a 43% tax on everything you buy. Awesome.

[DRV45N05]

Yeah, I don't think people that are for the "fair tax" realize the shocking effect a 26% tax on things is going to look like. People will start seeing bread and milk for $4 - $6 and luxury goods jump up a huge amount. They will then start scaling back their spending... depressing the economy.

The problem with the income tax is that the majority of people, all though they know it's subtracted from their salary, they never know what it's like to have to write a check for taxes. When you start having to write checks to the government for a few thousand dollars... you start becoming VERY aware of it.

Actually, increased substitution of saving for consumption is a GOOD effect of substituting consumption taxation for income taxation, as it removes the penalty for saving in an income tax, which leads to greater investment and capital creation and thus long-term growth. However, a consumption tax that is too high or not structured properly will have the effect of decreasing consumer purchasing power on the lower-middle end of the income distribution and thus depress spending in the short-term to the extent that the gain from increased saving is cancelled out, as expectations sour. Such will be the result of the FAIR Tax, which would actually have to be something in the neighborhood of 30% to even be revenue-neutral.

If we're going to go with a consumption tax to substitute for the income tax, the way to go is a Hall-Rabushka style flat tax, which would (above an exemption of a certain level of income) tax all income minus saving. This way, lower and middle income consumers are shielded significantly from the tax, and then after a certain income threshold, the incentive to save more would kick in big time.

However, let it be said that I favor eliminating the income tax and the NEED for a tax to replace it. ;) However, I can favor some excise taxes and, as a semi-Geolibertarian, land value taxes to replace that revenue.

[bobmurph]

Especially when people figure out that the 26% is the tax-inclusive tax rate. ie- it's a 35.1% tax if you figure it like a every normal human being does.

26% tax-inclusive rate would be like paying $100 for a $74 item - $26 of tax on the $100 total = 26%, but the $26 on top of the item's price of $74 is actually a 35% federal tax rate.

Add on the extra 8-9% tax from most state/local govt's and you end up with something like a 43% tax on everything you buy. Awesome.

Exactly. I've always heard the Fairtax as being 23% (never heard 26% before). But you're exactly right about it being "tax-inclusive". Nobody calculates tax rates the way the fairtax does...its just a dishonest way to calculate the rate to make it seem lower. The real rate is 30%.

However, I must say some of you guys are not very informed on the fairtax. I don't support it, but not for the same (misinformed) reasons posted above. i.e. goods costing more because of the fairtax. The price of new goods & services would actually be break even after the inclusion of the fairtax. This is becuase the fairtax eliminates corporate tax, as well as the income tax. Corporate tax is passed on to the consumer because it is "embedded" in the price of goods and ranges from 20-25% depending on the product. After corporate tax is eliminated, the market for force the price of goods down this 20-25%...the fairtax would then bump it back it back up...so the price of goods stay apporoximately the same. That's the argument at least.

OTOH, I oppose the fairtax for a few reasons.

#1. It does not repeal the 16th amendment. There is nothing preventing congress from enacting a new income tax sometime in the future unless the 16th Amendment is repealed. We could end up having an income tax and a national retail sales tax! Then we would really be screwed.

#2. The fairtax is the most progressive tax plan we could possibly enact.

#3. It does nothing to limit spending...which isn the bigger problem we face. Fairtax is a 'revenue neutral' tax.

#4. As stated before, the fairtax is 30%, not the dishonest 23% inclusive rate.

I think the fairtax is better than the current system. By Ron Paul's plan is head and shoulders better than the fair tax. Cut spending enough to eliminate the income tax.