Opinion Talk

By Steve Dollar

April 23, 2007 10:25 AM | Link to this

Mr Bookman,

You either didn’t read the book or you’re just a liar.

By jeff

April 23, 2007 10:27 AM | Link to this

What is wrong with drug dealers, prostitutes, and illegal immigrants paying their fair share of taxes? When you put everyone in to the tax paying pool it’s easy to see how there will be plenty of tax income for the feds to spend. I also like the idea of keeping my entire paycheck, WOW, and being able to decide how much in taxes I pay be deciding how much I will buy. Sound like the American Dream to me, count me in!

By Jim

April 23, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this

You just don’t get do you Jay? Have you read the book that explains this idea? I doubt it. Low income Americans don’t pay taxes now. You forgot to mention that people would keep ALL of their paycheck each week. You forgot to mention that more American jobs would be created as overseas companies move their operations back to the US. Oh, and did you mention that the cost of goods and services would go DOWN? Did you mention that the IRS and all of the costs associated with it (billions) would be eliminated? April 15th would be just another day. Do your homework Jay and quit misleading people.

By Mad Dog

April 23, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this

Steve Dollar,

The book was written by liars just to brain wash you.

One of the lies is calling the Fair????Tax voluntary. It’s like calling the current tax system voluntary.

If you don’t make money/spend money, you don’t pay any taxes.

Liars wrote the book, and idiots believe the book to be the final version of the tax gospel.

By Tim

April 23, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this

What an embarassing entry. You might want to remove it before you are blasted for ignorance. The Fair Tax changes the whole system. It almost completely gets rid of the IRS. It gets rid of embedded taxes at every level of manufacturing and distribution. It is not about balancing our current tax system. It is about creating efficiencies (low hanging fruit in the case of the U.S. tax system) and passing it on to the citizens.

You should understand the system before you try and poke holes in it. You might try and call in to the Boortz show but given that it appears that you have performed little or no due diligence on the proposed reform, he might not even take your call.

By Tom

April 23, 2007 10:35 AM | Link to this

Thank you Mr. Bookman for exposing the lies of the fair “to the rich” tax.

By Jeff

April 23, 2007 10:39 AM | Link to this

With a name like Dollar you would think he would know something about them, dollars.

Take off the democrat blinders and have a look around!

By jeff

April 23, 2007 10:41 AM | Link to this

In my anger towards the left I made my last response to Mr. Dollar, I appologize, it was meant for mad dog. Sorry Mr. Dollar!

By lopro

April 23, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this

Mr. Bookman, are you even educated? Research before you post such ignorant rantings. Economics is not as simple as plugging one number into a calculator to make an end-all argument against (or for) a system.

The FairTax is not a new concept that you may have heard about just last week. It has been thorughly studied in its present form. Other similar systems have been instituted in some former Soviet nations with outstanding success.

Why are you looking for SOMEONE to pay more? Why can’t we all save some of our hard-earned money? Yes, President Bush earns his money too.

By Al

April 23, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this

It’s obvious that Bookman has a problem with upper income people encountering a savings from the Fair Tax.

You spend more, you pay more taxes.

Bookman is an idiot because he just can’t allow people to save money. According to idiots like Bookman, that racist Tucker and the Hildabeast, it’s not your money, it’s the government’s money, and they will decide who can keep it.

By Brian Darby

April 23, 2007 10:48 AM | Link to this

Hmmm… should I believe the over $22 million dollars of research…or an AJC editor?

By Roger Daniels

April 23, 2007 10:48 AM | Link to this

I thought being a reporter meant doing some reporting, or research. If this reporter did not read the book, why is he writing about it? People read and believe your columns. You should not mislead your readers. The Fair Tax is not about George Bush, it’s about Americans getting what we desearve - a fair tax system.

By a

April 23, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this

fair tax is conservative talk show host folly… it would create a black market for EVERYTHING

By RoY

April 23, 2007 10:50 AM | Link to this

The FairTax is the most thoroughly researched piece of tax reform legislation ever presented to the U.S. Congress. Well over $20 million has been spent on economic and sociological research in putting this plan together, and the research continues to this day. Still, though, we have a tax reform proposal that actually transfers power to the people, and this is just not to be tolerated — especially by the left. So the procedure is to develop a list of lies and half-truths about the FairTax and then use those lies to go on the attack.

Such is the path that was taken in today’s Atlanta Journal-Constitution by Jay Bookman, the deputy editorial page editor. Bookman is a fervent liberal, a huge believer in the cause of big government. Perhaps he’s most troubled by the fact that the FairTax would constitute the biggest transfer of power from the government to the people since the formation of this country. He also may be upset that if the FairTax were to become the law of the land politicians would no longer be able to pursue their class warfare goals through tax policy. With the FairTax Jay Bookman would no longer be able to write opinion pieces relating to tax matters with constant references to “the richest 1%” and phrases like “pay their fair share.”

So … why pick on Jay Bookman today? Because he has a column in today’s AJC entitled “Fervent faith in FairTax defies reason.” First, a small critique. It’s “FairTax.” One word .. with the F and the T capitalized. No big deal? Well, you could actually read the bill or the book and discover this fact, or a few Google clicks. Besides .. the name is trademarked. I’m sure Mr. Bookman has a great fondness for accuracy .. so this should matter to him.

Wait! Did I say Jay Bookman had a fondness for accuracy? Sorry. By the second paragraph of his column we find out that this is not so. There he is, doing what so many other critics of the FairTax have done, blatantly lying about its terms. Bookman writes “Instead, those taxes will be replaced with a retail sales tax of 30 percent on all services and new goods.”

That is flat-out wrong, and he knows it to be flat-out wrong. Bookman has adopted the “first lie, then critique” policy of the FairTax opponents. The FairTax is a 23% inclusive tax, not 30%. The FairTax is a replacement for the income tax, so it is calculated using the same methods we use to calculate the income tax. You know —- comparing apples to apples and all that? I wonder if someone would do me the favor of researching the writings of one Jay Bookman to find out if he ever quotes our income tax on an exclusive basis. If he did, he would find out that the top rate is somewhere well over 50%. But wait! He likes the income tax, so those figures will be reported honestly.

The problem here is that you just know that if a critique of the FairTax contains a blatant and intentional misrepresentation in the second paragraph, there is not much that will follow that can be treated seriously. Sure enough … in the very next paragraph Bookman says that Congressman Linder has claimed that the FairTax would force prices down by as much as 30%. Wrong again. That figure is closer to 22%.

And so it goes. Misrepresent, then attack. The tactics of the left.

Hey … here’s an idea! I’m up for a fight right now. How about a public debate somewhere? Jay Bookman and me! Look, I’ve debated Yale tax law professors and former deputy assistant Treasury secretaries on the FairTax, I think I might be able to stand up pretty well against a deputy editorial page editor who finds it necessary to lie about an idea before he can criticize it.

Date and time? We’ll work it out!

By the way …. don’t forget we’re going to have a huge FairTax Rally in Columbia, South Carolina on the evening of May 15th. Details to follow.

By Laverne

April 23, 2007 10:51 AM | Link to this

Oh Simple Mad Dog, the Fair Tax is voluntary because each individual decides what he/she wants to purchase and hence pay taxes on. Since you think Boortz and Linder are liars, it is likely you did not even read the book. Try it! They spell out their ideas for even the simple-minded to understand.

By Thomas

April 23, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this

Mad Dog,

Very intelligent commentary explaining your oppostion to the Fair Tax. Since you cannot add a resonable dissent, you go to the tried and true “name calling”. Liars?? Give some proof. Oh, you left out “nazis”. Go back to your playbook.

By Steve

April 23, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this

Lets see… i want a tax that taxes what i produce and earn or i want a tax that taxes what i consume and use… hmm.. i wonder which one is more fair? Would getting rid of the IRS really be such a bad thing? Get a grip

By Shea

April 23, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this

Here is some food for thought. I currently have my own business. I have so many deductions that I pay very little taxes on any level. Under the fair tax I will certainly pay a tremendously higher overall tax as I purchase many, many goods. But what “fair” is fair and I do not mind paying my equal share. You doubters out there will continue to bless the power hungry in Washington to be able to minipulate our screwed up tax system. Yes they love the gifts and trips given to them by lobbists so that they tack on tax break earmarks on every bill that passes. Quit griping about who may save a little and pay more. WE HAVE TO GET A TAX SYSTEM THAT TAKES POWER AWAY FROM THE LEGISTATORS. Corruption will never end in any country or government until the end of time… but we certainly have the ability to learn from our mistakes and limit it as much as possible.

By Jerry Dunn

April 23, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this

Guess what I don’t care if I pay more or less under the Fair Tax. Although I definetly believe I will pay less. Cause my main thing is that the Fair Tax means less hassle, no paperwork for the individual to deal with, no wondering if you can take a deduction or not. If I want to pay less in taxes then just spend less. If I want to pay more then spend more. And as someone else said earlier with the Fair Tax drug dealers, illegal immigrants and tourists would pay their fair share of taxes for a change.

By Akagi

April 23, 2007 10:52 AM | Link to this

The tax is 100% voluntary since the tax is only applied once you purchase something and it is you that decides what to buy and when.

Also corporations do not pay taxes now—they simply collect them. These taxes are paid by the consumers in the form of higher prices.

By Russell

April 23, 2007 10:53 AM | Link to this

Step 1) Read book Step 2) Open mouth

Not the opposite.

By Cooter Bob

April 23, 2007 10:54 AM | Link to this

Bookman is so far left that even if he believes a plan like this to work (which it would), he would not approve of it. Liberalism is a mental disorder!!

By Berry

April 23, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this

What is interesting to me is that our own state legislation is looking into the fair tax at the state level with regards to state and income tax. It was introduced this past week. It seems to me that this would be a great alternative to the federal bureaucracy that is occuring in Congress.

By Peter

April 23, 2007 10:57 AM | Link to this

Those in the upper income ranges, who weekend and vacation abroad … . will pay consumption taxes in foreign countries? (The mega rich will hoard their welfare windfall.)

No chance of a black market that might appear if we switched to a “fair tax?”

I pay $123,000 for a new house (with tax included) and only expect $100,000 on resale? (The assumption being that only the first purchase will be taxed and future buyers will not have that expense.) That’s crazy ! ! !

By Casey

April 23, 2007 10:59 AM | Link to this

This is a good example of why ignorant people shouldn’t write articles on topics they know nothing about. Don’t be lazy Bookman… do some research before you embarrass yourself even more. The class warfare rhetoric is getting pretty old.

By Casey

April 23, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

This is a good example of why ignorant people shouldn’t write articles on topics they know nothing about. Don’t be lazy Bookman… do some research before you embarrass yourself even more. The class warfare rhetoric is getting pretty old.

By Jack

April 23, 2007 11:01 AM | Link to this

The Fair Tax would eliminate being paid “under the table”. Everyone would be equal when it comes to a paycheck!

There would be no Federal withholdings.

I would surmise that after your state sees what a wonderful process this Fair Tax is, that they would implement it as well. You would only be taxed when you spend! You would not be taxed on the basic necessities of life!

By Dave

April 23, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this

Seriously - Read the book and then try to comment on it. This says a lot about reporters / columnists when it is so obvious you are commenting on somethng you haven’t even read.

By Typical Liberal Editorial Writer...

April 23, 2007 11:02 AM | Link to this

This is so typical of a liberal. You can’t argue or debate the issue on the facts, so you just simply make things up out of thin air to try to make your point.

I can’t believe how incredibly lame and weak your argument is, which consists of just making up numbers out of the blue and thinking that somehow proves your point.

One other point, your column completely misrepresents the facts of the fair tax pertaining to the rate. Are you even aware of the concept of an inclusive tax versus an exclusive tax? Based on your writings, you obviously have no understanding of those two concepts or economics in general. Journalists should not try to pretend that they are economists.

Oh and by the way, lets see how much conviction you truely have behind your argument and stance on this issue. Neal Boortz has challenged you to a debate. Will you actually show some backbone and take him up on the offer, or will you do what so many liberal columnists do, and just hide under your desk?

If you don’t take him up on the offer, it is an implicit admission that you know how weak your argument is and that it would be debunked in a resounding fashion.

Come on Jay, man up and debate Neal you intellectually dishonest weasel.

By Russ

April 23, 2007 11:09 AM | Link to this

Thanks Mad Dog,

People like you who cannot articulate opinions and revert to name calling to defend a political opinion make the fight for a true “Fair Tax” even easier. We miss people like you and Cynthia McKinney .People like you make others run from the Democratic Party. Who wants to be associated with hot head name callers such as yourself & McKinney. It is so easy to look smart next to people like you two.

The only politicians against it are the ones who try to get votes form people who obtain their income illegally and pay no state or national income tax. How could any one who works a legal job not love the Fair Tax Plan ?

Finally drug dealers & illegal immigrants can contribute finacially to a society they have never done anything but burden fiancially in the past. Is not great to now get some revenue from drug dealers since the honest American’s tax dollars has been funding their prosecution and investigations for decades.

A fair tax would do wonders for the Latin Immigration Issue. All illegal immigrants should be for this. The #1 reason current American Citizens are so against illegal immigrants is due to the impossible task of taxation without something as simple and useful as the Fair Tax Plan that would tax everyone in the country based on how much they choose to consume. THAT MY FRIEND IS FREEDOM !!!

Democrats against this plan argue: How can every one save money on taxes ? Some body’s taxes must go up for this to balance out. They just don’t have the guts to be honest with you. The buck is past on to: 1. All the foreign tourist who visit are country annualy spending billion of $$ annually. 2. Millions of Illegal Immigrants currently paid cash under the table 3. All the $$$$$ from illegal drug dealers. Now their rims, fancy cars, and bling bling, and all their other showy crap will be taxed.

Finally America has a plan that makes since !!!!

By Christi

April 23, 2007 11:13 AM | Link to this

The fair tax is the way to go. This is the greatest country in the world and yet the IRS and the current tax system snubs the kind of financial independence that could turn this country around. Imagine getting government out of making a living. The fair tax would allow a man to make money for his family without redtape, he could work with his hands and own his own destiny. I have a small business and I could hire employees, provide more opp. to others if I did not have the hassle with taxes.

By Bill

April 23, 2007 11:16 AM | Link to this

Yup, the numbers are way out of whack between the column and the book.

Something has not been mentioned is the PREBATE. Under Jay’s example (and not talked about ANYWHERE in his column), that couple making 40,000/yr. would receive a prebate, basically giving them funds to counteract the “tax increase”.

Also, what few fail to do is look to the state of Florida as an example. they have no personal income tax, just an exclusive sales tax. If I want to save money, I don’t spend as much down there.

If Florida and several other states have some form of a FairTax (as close of a working example as one can find) and it has worked for years, why be afraid of something that can bring true wealth and jobs back to the US and give the working poor a chance at a better job and life, AND reduce their tax burden by giving them a check every month?

Geez……

By John

April 23, 2007 11:19 AM | Link to this

If it has not occured to eveyone, the Fair Tax would almost solve the illegal immigration problem all by itself. Or the entire country would reap the benefit of an influx in tax revenue due to the underground economy now paying their fair share.

Illegals would automatically become tax paying “citizens” and if they wished to secure any type of prebate, they would have to register somehow. If they register, we’ve solved the registration issue. If they elect to “not” register, they would have no choice but to increase the cost for their services since they would now be paying taxes that they had not paid in the past everytime they purchase something here in the US.

This might then make this labor force more competitive with law-abiding, tax-paying individuals performing the same work.

Overnight, we would have solved much of the problem of the underground economy that is currently paying NO tax. The benefit would be to eveyone…rich or poor…but perhaps just not to illegal aliens. This might go a long way to help pay for schools, healthcare, and social services that are being utilized by these illegal workers and their families, or for that matter anyone in the underground economy.

Finally, Mr. Bookman should worry less about what other people do or do not pay and read the book. Then I’d encourage him to be honest with his readers.

By jeff

April 23, 2007 11:20 AM | Link to this

Hey Bookman, if you don’t think it will work and you would enjoy proving it, tell everyone to support it and if it fails, you can say ” I told you so.”

By Fisher

April 23, 2007 11:21 AM | Link to this

Bookman, you lie! You lie! You lie! And you do it with malice aforethough! Not only do you cite the conditions incorrectly, you do the calculations incorrectly! All with the intention to confuse and mislead. Typical liberal crap! At least educate yourself before you try to say something to others.

First of all, the sales tax is 23% not 30 percent. Secondly, everyone pays that hiddent 23 percent sales tax already including the poor. At least they will not have to pay it under the Fair Tax. Secondly, you can expect the wealthy to pay more tax because they will SPEND more! And all of us will have more to spend.

There are no smoke and mirrors here. Read the Fair Tax book. All of it! And quit taking things out of context just to support YOUR preconceived concepts.

If your column is representative of how the AJC reports its other news, it isn’t even fit to wrap garbage and you should be ashamed to even accept a paycheck for your stuff. But then, we know that you have no honor, don’t we.

By Hank

April 23, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this

Which of you “busniness owners” are going to lower your prices?

Then, if this boondoggle ever gets enacted we can see whether you’re a money hungry wh0re or a decent person.

I’m putting some of my money on “wh0re” but I’m putting most of it on “you’re too much of a putz to man up and speak.”

By MadCactus

April 23, 2007 11:25 AM | Link to this

As a small business owner, I am constantly amazed at how many “honest” small business people pay their employees under the table. And I am not just talking about the “undocumented” among us; the vast majority of the individuals I come across are full blooded, red, white and blue Americans. They get paid under the table, and then collect from those of us who are honest come April 15th. There is a huge untapped segment of the population that currently cheats our outdated system.

By GenXDen

April 23, 2007 11:27 AM | Link to this

I find it funny that people are attacking “Mad Dog” for name calling yet they’re using derogatory terms in their attacks (not all, mind you, just some) which simply means they are no better (or worse) in their response. Had to get that out of my system.

On to serious matters…can someone recommend a good site to really learn more about this? I don’t want just one side of the story…I would like to read the pro’s and con’s. I admit that I’ve been somewhat remiss in exploring what this movement is truly about but was thinking (whilst doing my taxes) that I really needed to educate myself about this!!

By R. S.

April 23, 2007 11:29 AM | Link to this

Mr. Bookman, You must be a graduate of our public school system, so sorry that you don’t undersatnd the simple concept of the “Fair Tax” system. read the book, whoops! forgot, public school graduate.

By jeff

April 23, 2007 11:30 AM | Link to this

Prices are driven by the market and competition, when one business lowers their prices to drive sales, which they can because the tax burden is gone, other businesses will as well. Simple economics.

By Common Sense

April 23, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this

Hank, the free market drives competition. One of the tactics competitors use to attract more customers than their rival is by lowering the price of goods and services. Competition will bring the price tag down. Also, with businesses not having to pay imbeded federal taxes anymore, they will be able to afford to lower prices. But I guess you know this anyway based on the intelligence level you so eloquently demonstrated in your entry.

By fairtax.org

April 23, 2007 11:32 AM | Link to this

fairtax.org

By Hegelian

April 23, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this

This Fair Tax marches in lock step with the REAL ID Act. How? Have you ever been carded for beer or smokes when you are obviously over 40 or 50 years old? Or seen a card carrying AARP member get the same ridiculous request in front of you at the checkout line? Ridiculous right? Well, in order for our loving benefactors (Govt) to further develop their agenda— they need to do a few things such as: 1) complete the picture as to our purchasing habits motives, etc… 2) eliminate cash—since everything will be purchased by swiping your “Card”— currently a credit card/debit card— but the next phase is attaching the drivers license to those accounts, 3) attaching the taxing mechanism to the purchaseof items of desire—and more importantly necessity— so as the phony Conservative/Libertarian Boortz can say with some element of truth— it is an indirect tax— ie: only charged to you if you purchase the product.
Problem is— the IRS should then be totally eliminated—but it won’t. They have already conceded that it will be reduced, or almost totally eliminated. Guess what…when the IRS was first introduced in 1913 the argument was that we needed it and it started as only a 1% tax on the wealthy and it could never ever possibly reach levels in excess of 20% or so—that would be outrageous (<—sarcasm). As homework, just take a look at what the rates peaked at… Anyway, it was incrementally foisted upon us and look at it now. Now, a complex database can and will be kept on just what you buy, when you buy it and how much you buy of it. Then, do you think health care companies will want that data? You bet. Will their rates rise or fall? You better believe your diet better have tofu, rabbit food and other such things on it in order to keep your rates low.
Don’t be the joker at the party buying the keg of beer in your name.
There is something sweet about anonymity and the government hates it. Remember in life there are good reasons for laws and there are also the REAL reasons for laws. Politicians are groomed at the art of selling the good reasons and tap dancing around the real ones….

By Fisher

April 23, 2007 11:36 AM | Link to this

To GenXDen You can get full details of the Fair Tax at www.fairtax.org They can give you the skinny.

For opposing views, you can try moveon.org, Bookman’s favorite site, but they won’t tell the truth any more than Bookman did.

By Jozef

April 23, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this

Mr. Bookman,

Most of my reaction to your article has been already expressed by others, but just to give you a point of reference, consider that my current tax rate under the existing system is 52%. This includes my state and federal income taxes, embedded income taxes for goods and services I purchase, state sale taxes, and unearned interest on monthly withholding. Compared to the 23% sales tax (not 30% as you incorrectly claim), Fair Tax would cut my taxes nearly by half. Actually, the effective tax rate would be even lower than the 23%, thanks to prebates on sales taxes on basic necessities.

By JJ

April 23, 2007 11:41 AM | Link to this

Is this the same Bookman from “Good Times”, or just the same intellectual level? Well, as the Evans family would say: “READ THE BOOK, BOOGA!!!”

By Hank

April 23, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this

Lie #2:the FairTax rate would be 23 percent. Throughout the book, Boortz gives the FairTax rate as 23 percent. It is not until near the end of the book—in the chapter, “Questions and Objections”—that he admits it is really 30 percent. But even then he still insists it is 23 percent.

Those of us who were skeptical from the beginning noticed this when we got to page 84. There Boortz used the example of a single mother with two children spending $45 a week on groceries. He claims that the removal of the taxes currently embedded in the price would lower the cost of the groceries to $35.10 (a dubious proposition). But then he says: “Add the FairTax, and the groceries would cost $45.58. I learned in the sixth grade that if an item cost $35.10, and I add to it $10.48 in sales tax, then I paid a tax rate of almost 30 percent—not 23 percent. Boortz says in the “Questions and Objections” chapter that “critics of the FairTax have a way of dwelling on this 30 percent figure.” I wonder why? Although Boortz explains that he is using an exclusive rate rather than an inclusive rate to figure the percentage, his “mathematical equivalent of a game of semantics” still results in a FairTax rate of 30 percent. This is why Boortz prefers the national sales tax to be included in the price of each item—so the consumer doesn’t realize that he is really paying an extra 30 percent in sales tax, not Boortz’s new math amount of 23 percent.

Source article

Common Sense — Thomas Paine is rolling over in his grave as you are an idiot.

By larry

April 23, 2007 11:42 AM | Link to this

Bookman is a liar and a fraud. He may or may not understand the Fair Tax; but, he is certainly misstating what it is and how it works.

He is more concerned that the Bushes may get a tax break than how the plan actually works.

Bookman is typical of the media these days. His ilk are those from whom we need protection.

By Joe

April 23, 2007 11:48 AM | Link to this

Can’t say it any better than the other posts have Mr. Bookman. Opinion is one thing and is appropriate in editorial comment. Lies are not. You are a liar!!!

By Hank

April 23, 2007 11:50 AM | Link to this

Problem #14: The FairTax does not eliminate all federal taxes. Although it is implied throughout the book that the FairTax will be a replacement for the various federal taxes, there are some federal taxes that will still be with us under the FairTax. Even Boortz slips up one time and says that the FairTax would “replace virtually all personal and corporate taxes.” Two examples of federal taxes that will still be with us under the FairTax are the excise tax on gasoline and the various taxes that one pays when purchasing an airline ticket. There is no mention of the federal gas tax anywhere in the Fair Tax Act of 2005. No list of taxes that are supposed to be eliminated under the FairTax includes the federal gas tax, which adds 18.4 cents to the price of a gallon of gas. So under the FairTax, we would have added to each gallon of gas federal excise tax, state excise tax, and federal sales tax. This is just the minimum. The states could also begin applying their sales tax to gasoline. A recent airline ticket I purchased had added to its price a federal excise tax of $15.28, a federal segment tax of $12.80, and a September 11th security fee of $10.00. And what about federal taxes on tobacco and alcohol? The FairTax will merely replace one visible tax with another while leaving intact the invisible ones.

Source Article

By G-Man

April 23, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this

I have not read the book but have heard it mentioned on Boortz. I’ve have some question about it.

Just look’n for answers not trying to start a fight.

By Fisher

April 23, 2007 11:58 AM | Link to this

To Hank,

Imagine! Someone with a 30 cent pencil challenging $22 million of research! I guess you just feel your answers. Typical leftist approach.

You obviously didn’t read the book either. Or if you did, you didn’t bother to even try to understand it. Go back and read the chapter again, all of it this time! The answer is right in front of you.

But, then, you probably don’t have the book. You either borrowed it or read it over someone’s shoulder.

By Koz

April 23, 2007 12:03 PM | Link to this

We would obviously make a lot of money from Vistors/tourists and from illegals already here. Hence lessening the burden on citizens.

By modestd

April 23, 2007 12:07 PM | Link to this

Roy, Please post your own comments and do not “lift” them from Boortz’s website. You dont even give him credit for writing it. That my friend is called PLAGIARISM!! You are as in the wrong as JB not doing his HW! FairTax is great no matter if you are a liberal or a conservative. Please do not blast the “liberals” or “democrats”. Some like the FairTax just as much as you “republicans” You do nothing but destroy any type of following for the FairTax with your ignorant comments. Be Smart!

By Hegelian

April 23, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

Hank mentions the gas tax… That will stay there and while we march toward more efficient autos that run more and more on electricity, etc… The cry from our leaders will be that they cannot afford to maintain our roads because of decreased revenues from the gas tax due decreased gas consumption and thus will need to implement a tax-by-mile charge on us all—that will, of course, be “FAIR” (<-pronounced like Boortz does his mamby-pamby liberal whine.) This will be implemented by using tracker chips in all license plates and autos in order to track and find everywhere we go, and charge us accordingly. Don’t you love Freedom? If Boortz is so Libertarian, why doesn’t he rail against this? Be watchful of his (and most politicians) verbal slight-of-hand…it is most magical. Boortz only give lip service to fundamental Libertarian principals- but in reality is another Bush cheerleader…

How does this relate to the Fair tax question you might wonder? Be careful to get caught up in the debate over what color the Trojan horse is, or argue over the number of hairs on its tail—Be skeptical in all regards to the true intent of this legislation

By MAC

April 23, 2007 12:13 PM | Link to this

I have a good example of who would pay more, Mr. Bookman. John and Theresa Heinz Kerry, who earn little income, yet spend their trust funds (which they didn’t earn) tens of millions of dollars per year, tax free.

Wealthy retirees would pay more too since they are spending but not earning.

On the other hand, millions of people would be encouraged to save more and consume less. Where are all the “green” hypocrites on this? The fair tax has much more impact on limiting resource consumption than flourescent bulbs!

By Koz

April 23, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this

Is it just me or does Prebate sound like a dirty word?

By KP

April 23, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this

I’m skeptical about the plan for two reasons — 1) despite the talk about “fairness”, the primary attraction of the plan depends upon the public’s dislike of the IRS; 2) the use of state revenue agencies as intermediaries will be a political disaster, above and beyond the fact that they will replace the IRS as everyone’s “heavy”.

No less a political icon than Alexander Hamilton himself said — in Federalist 42 — the federal government cannot rely on the states to act as the fed’s revenue collectors. That was one of the primary problems with the political arrangement prior to the Constitution’s ratification.

What’s attractive about the plan is its’ relative transparency. After all, does anyone know how much of their purchasing power is eaten up by hidden taxes, such as excise taxes?

As a first step, wouldn’t it be helpful to the fairness debate if our receipts and electronic purchasing records broke down all of the taxes — sales taxes, excise taxes, fees — paid on each purchase so we can determine just how much government takes from our spending as well as our income?

Let’s call it the Transparency in Purchasing Power Electronic Records (TIPPER) Act.

And we’re really not that far from making it a reality. Bank of America already provides me with my bank statements in downloadable XML. Just add a few tags for the various taxes and poof! — the wish is granted.

By GenXDen

April 23, 2007 12:32 PM | Link to this

Thanks, Fisher, for your response. I’m going to the site immediately!

By Dave

April 23, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I have prepared tax returns as a professional or as a volunteer for almost thirty years, so I would like to think that I have a pretty good idea of how our tax system works. I am currently a professional tax consultant for a number of high-income earners. While I have NOT read the book, I have, over the years, seen and researched the numerous flat-tax or fair-tax proposals that have come and gone over the years.

Here are my observations; take them for what they are worth:

• The current income tax system, while overly complicated and bewildering to the average citizen, is a product of the American public’s demand that taxes be paid by those who can afford to pay such taxes. While it is imperfect and, in many individual cases, often unfair, it is, for the most part, rather equitable in delivering on that demand: Those who CAN afford to pay the income tax do in fact PAY the income tax.

• ALL flat-tax or fair-tax proposals have been made by those who are high-income earners who pay the bulk of the income tax under the current system. They thoroughly understand the ins-and-outs of the current system (if they do not understand it, they pay people like me who DO understand it to advise them), and they recognize that they WILL CONTINUE TO PAY the bulk of the tax load imposed on the American public unless they engage in practices which the IRS normally classifies as tax fraud or until the basic income tax system itself is scrapped.

• Each of these fair/flat tax supporters stand to benefit GREATLY if the “Fair Tax” is approved as written. NOT ONE of these people will pay MORE tax under the proposed Fair Tax system. IMHO, that fact should be BOTH OBVIOUS and SIGNIFICANT. It also pays credence to the main point of Mr. Bookman’s article: If these people (who CAN afford to pay the income tax as currently structured) are paying LESS, then who will be paying MORE??

• Consider this: Under the current system, a single person who makes $500,000 in taxable income pays about $154,861 in federal income (just under 31%) while someone who makes $20,000 in taxable income pays $2,623 in taxes (just over 13%)? These figures are right out of the 2006 federal income tax tables for a SINGLE person. On its face, it is seems unfair that the person who makes the higher income pays a tax rate three times greater than the low income earner. However, can anyone deny the simple fact that the $500K income earner can in fact AFFORD to pay this tax without suffering a significant blow to his or her lifestyle, while the $20K income earner probably struggles to pay his or her 13% tax rate?? Think about this!! Think about it LONG and HARD!!

• Finally, much has been made about “getting rid of the IRS”, because, with no income tax, there would be no need for the IRS. This is A BLATANT FALSEHOOD. The IRS mission would simply be changed from enforcing the current income tax laws to enforcing the new Fair Tax Sales Tax laws. Does ANYONE out there REALLY think there would not be a MASSIVE ATTEMPT to avoid this new 23 – 34% retail sales tax? If you think so, then you have not read your history about the black markets that cropped up EVERY TIME when high sales taxes were imposed on certain commodities (like cigarettes and liquor). A WHOLE NEW underground economy will result from the implementation of this law. Avoiding the Fair Tax GUARANTEES a savings of AT LEAST 23%!! If someone is willing to cheat on their income tax, why would they NOT want to cheat on the Fair Tax?

Just my humble opinion!

By sansho1

April 23, 2007 12:41 PM | Link to this

The above commenter is correct that the Linder/Boortz plan actually calls for a 30 percent sales tax, not 23 percent. They mask it as follows:

Something costs a dollar before tax. With the Fair Tax, the total charge would be $1.30. Thirty cents is 23 percent of $1.30. Hence they claim a 23 percent tax rate, but use post-tax dollars to create the illusion. Thirty percent will be added to your purchase under the Fair Tax.

By Claude

April 23, 2007 12:44 PM | Link to this

Perhaps the biggest delusion of Fair Tax advocates is how easy it will be to collect the $3 trillion or so the federal government has to collect year year. The proposal to “eliminate the IRS” does so only by turning millions of Americans into tax collectors. Every babysitter, every barber, every plumber, everyone who mows lawns, every doctor, every dentist, every shoe-shiner, every masseuse, every lawyer, every investment banker, every insurance agent, every car-washer, every dry cleaner, and so on will be required to collect the tax and submit it to the government. Somehow, I suspect the compliance rate will fall short of 100%. And then there’e the totally unworkable “prebate”, which requires that the federal government know how many people are living in each household each month. So we’ll have a federal agency tracking the comings and goings of live-in boyfriends. You’re right, Jay, the Fair Tax movement is a cult.

By Real Ist

April 23, 2007 12:51 PM | Link to this

The Boretz scheme is nothing more than smoke & mirrors contrived by a draft dodger whose middle name is Adolf (so named at the end of WW II; draw your own conclusions). The IRS would not be abolished, simply one lousy system replaced by a fraudulent one. Bookman and Boretz should kill each other, and hoi polloi would benefit.

By JustMe

April 23, 2007 12:52 PM | Link to this

This is “fair tax” just like the “porno industry” is in Indonesia! In Indonesia, holding hands in public is considered porno!!!!!

Don’t you love the way crooks use misleading words to label things?

By Ted P

April 23, 2007 12:56 PM | Link to this

Why not try the Far Tax, if does not work we will still have the 5,000 pages of current tax code to go back to. Why would anybody not want to at least try it?

By Kyle

April 23, 2007 1:01 PM | Link to this

Why should the poor not pay the same tax rate as the rich? Rich people are smarter, work harder, and should be treated the same as the “bad luck” poor. I say you make your own luck, and the poor are that way because they choose to be that way.

By Kurtis R.E. Segars

April 23, 2007 1:07 PM | Link to this

Scary that a guy who can’t even look up the answer to simple questions in a book that easily explains them has a job like this.

By ryan

April 23, 2007 1:09 PM | Link to this

The money is saved by eliminating the IRS. So unless you’re an IRS (or Jackson-Hewitt/H&R Block/etc) employee, then you pretty much win.

By John

April 23, 2007 1:10 PM | Link to this

To Dave the Tax Preparer above….

If after 30 years of preparing tax returns, you can honestly still say that it is equitable for people to pay tax because they “can” or in fact pay more since it will have less “negative impact” on them and they can AFFORD it more than a low income earner…how dare you.

First, this is socialism…”to each his own according to his means,” and who do you think employs the lower earner.

With your suggestion, let’s tax the high earnning emplower more because he can “afford” it more; than the lower tax payer won’t have to worry about taxes any more at all because they would be out of a job!

By MrLiberty

April 23, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this

For the economically illiterate - corporations do not pay taxes. Only individuals pay taxes. Corporations pass their costs onto their consumers in the form of higher prices, poorer service, etc.

If Mr. Bookman wanted to identify things wrong with the Fair Tax plan he would have started with the fact that nowhere in the plan is the abolishment of the 16th amendment to the constitution which allows for the direct taxation of income. With the greedy scumbags of both parties in Washington we will end up with both an income AND a sales tax.

The other big problem is that the plan is REVENUE NEUTRAL - as if the government deserves to have as much money as they are getting now.

How’s about this for a Fair Tax - 0% of all income and no other substitute. To pay for it, cut the government down to the size actually enumerated in the Constitution and let existing tarrifs and excise taxes pay for everything.

Wow, abiding by the law of the land, restoring the republic, and abandoning the failed empire agenda. Almost makes america sound nice again. Don’t hold your breath.

By Nish

April 23, 2007 1:22 PM | Link to this

I AM A MONKEY

Typical left speak: So who would pay more?

This is a value judgement. Who is more entitled to their wealth?

Suddenly it isn’t based upon distributing the cost of common needs through everyone - instead it’s based on the judgement that since you earned more than someone else you owe.

It’s funny that there’s zero judgement on individuals from liberals - or at least a facade indicating that they don’t judge people; but yet there is an overwhelming willingness to judge a person’s income and how it should be redistributed to the masses.

Consumption tax is too difficult for people who judge others’ worth to understand.

By jeff

April 23, 2007 1:22 PM | Link to this

Bookman, You have no idea how much federal tax would be saved if you do not have receipts of ever purchase made by the tax payer to do a comparison. This is more crap from the left to discredit a sound tax reform idea. And one other thing, You not even talking about the removal of payroll taxes. Take that off as well and you will then see how much difference it makes. And yes, Corporations will pay taxes. They will pay taxes on all the corporate purchases as well. The Idea is how much more investment dollars will be plowed into the economy. And the IRS even admits right now that there are Billions of taxes not getting collected. This would eliminate all that. There would be no more tax cheats. But the Tax would be fair and you would control how and when you pay tax. READ THE BOOK!!!! The DEMOCRATES do not want to gove up control. That is why they are fighting this. You can only control a population through income tax. IT’s about CONTROL! they do not care one thing about being fair.

By leigh

April 23, 2007 1:27 PM | Link to this

It is obvious by reading the opinion of the AJC writer and the comments posted by the naysayers that none of you have read the book or researched the fair tax. This would be a great thing for all not just the rich or for the poor…EVERYONE including illegals would pay their “fair” share.

By jeff

April 23, 2007 1:35 PM | Link to this

to GENXDEN,

In my humble opinion, READ THE BOOK BEFORE YOU GIVE YOUR HUMBLE OPINION!!! You do not know what your talking about. First, All households would get a rebate every month for taxes paid on food. Second, The tax rate on products would not go up that much more than they are now because all embeded taxes placed on corporations would be eliminated. All products sold today have nearly 23% embeded taxes from production included. Those would go away and the law of competition would cause the price to adjust downward. The the Sales tax would be added and the walk our price for the purchase would be nearly the same as before. EXCEPT NO INCOME TAX!! I can surely see why an accountant would be againts the Fair Tax!!!!

By Jay is right!

April 23, 2007 1:38 PM | Link to this

These comments crack me up! And they only serve to prove Jay’s point about the FairTaxers being a cult. They all attack Jay, but few — if any — try to address or refute his key point, which is that if everyone’s taxes go down under the FairTax, how can the FairTax possbily be revenue neutral?

Boortz’s criticism of Jay’s column boils down to: (a) Jay misspelled the FairTax, and (b) Jay had the nerve to quote the FairTax in a tax-exlusive rate rather than the Boortz-speak tax-inclusive rate. Then he fails to address how it can be revenue neutral.

For those who think the lost revenue will be made up by illegal immigrants and the underground economy, think again. Illegal immigrants and the underground economy are already taxed when they buy things today. The seller of goods to the immigrant and drug dealer must report and pay income taxes on those sales (just as the seller would collect and pay the tax under the FairTax system). So the end result will be the same. That’s why no economist — even those few who support the FairTax — argue that the FairTax would be a way to tax the underground economy.

But, I know I’m not going to change anyone’s ideas on this. It will take a far more experienced deprogrammer than me to do so.

By John

April 23, 2007 1:51 PM | Link to this

Underground economy already taxed??? Try 6-7% current sales tax vs 23% under the fair tax. Please pay attention folks.

Do the math, read the book, get eductated, then come back.

Most folkds do not care about Jay, Boortz, or anyone else other than their own families. This thread is going no where until you have all read the book…and maybe it might be a good idea for all of the detractors of the Fair Tax, or any other idea such as this, to go back and look at the income tax return you filed last week. How can the present system be considered fair to anyone…rich or poor?

If you want to criticize the Fair Tax Plan fine, but then let’s see Mr. Bookman’s or anyone else’s alternative solution and tax plan other than to raise the tax rate on the gainfully employed. We are all waiting…

By aldread

April 23, 2007 1:52 PM | Link to this

Doesn’t anybody see that this is a plot to allow the wealthy to pay tax on only the fraction of their income that they spend, while the rest of us pay tax on nearly ALL our income?

Plus, it’s obviously going to create a huge black market in untaxed goods, plus it will encourage people to not spend money in the USA!

Wake up!

It’s a TROJAN HORSE for the rich!

By Craig

April 23, 2007 2:06 PM | Link to this

Jay - of course it’s a cult - most of the people posting here prove that. Constant repetition of the drivel spouted by their dear leader. Absolute inability to think logically. Amazing how they spout word for word the rantings of a radio talk show host. I despair for the future of this country.

If this boondoggle passes, most people WILL pay more in taxes than they pay today. Period. And cheating will be rampant.

By Debbie DuBois

April 23, 2007 2:08 PM | Link to this

Those of us who have done our homework understand that corporations don’t pay taxes, consumers do. They pass along all their taxes, including their IRS compliance costs onto none other than you and me. So the cost of products will stay relatively the same as now. But, we all get to keep our hard earned paychecks. AND, get a prebate for taxes paid up to the poverty level. The tax base will become 300 million instead of 30 million, so the underground economy—you know those people who get away without paying any taxes!—will finally have to contribute. I this the model as drafted in the Legislation now on Capital Hill is sound tax policy. You should do more research!

By the stopper

April 23, 2007 2:12 PM | Link to this

*Wake up!

It’s a TROJAN HORSE for the rich!*

Wrong.

It’s an unworkable joke. The “FairTax” will never be enacted.

By the stopper

April 23, 2007 2:14 PM | Link to this

If this boondoggle passes

It won’t.

By Scott Peter

April 23, 2007 2:16 PM | Link to this

After reading your column you have seem to forget one thing. With the fair tax all people in the United States would be required to pay a surcharge on goods bought including illegals! How much money would that generate??

By DD

April 23, 2007 2:19 PM | Link to this

Steal more from the poor and give to the rich with your snake oil Fair Tax. WTG you ‘moral’ Republicans.

By lopro

April 23, 2007 2:19 PM | Link to this

aldread, I believe what you speak of what be classified under the Law of Diminishing Returns. It so happens that it is an economic law where as income goes up, the utility of a dollar goes up until it reaches a point where utility is leveled off. This occurs in capitalist economies. Otherwise, if we redistribute all of the wealthy people’s earnings to people who do not pay taxes then wealth ceases to exist. This happened with communism. You know, that blight of the world that we fought so dilligently to remove for so many years so that the United States would remain free and its citizens could have incentive for prosperity.

I am not wealthy yet but I hope with an encourging tax structure that I can be one day. Otherwise, I might just hang around in mediocrity and let someone else work hard for me, right?

By Blind Homer

April 23, 2007 2:21 PM | Link to this

Everyone of you that quotes the rate as 23% is an idiot. It’s $.23 of every $1.00 on the register. By traditional measurements that means you got a $.77 item and paid $.23 tax. $.23/$.77 = 30% you bloody wankers!

By steve

April 23, 2007 2:22 PM | Link to this

All Dems..have someone read this to you..

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for

all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes,

it would go something like this:

with the arrangement, until on day, the owner threw them a curve. “Since

you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost

of your daily beer by $20.”Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for

free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could

they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair

share?’ They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they

subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth

man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner

suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the

same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

savings).

continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men

began to compare their savings.

pointed to the tenth man,” but he got $10!”

dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!” “That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!” “Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!” The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

By Joe L

April 23, 2007 2:30 PM | Link to this

“tax base will become 300 million instead of 30 million”

Riiighhhtt. Where are these supposed 270 million people hiding? I guess they are all the illegal aliens that are invading America and destroying our “way of life” right? Or are the all the poor Americans who don’t pay taxes now (who supposedly will stay untaxed based on the prebate).

When you make up ridiculous figures like this to “explain” how the consumption tax is feasible you pretty much prove exactly what Bookman is saying.

By Debbie DuBois

April 23, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this

I fully support the FairTax and I happen to be a Democrat! This is not a Republican issue, this is an American issue. I am voting Barack Obama for President, but I still believe the FairTax is the best way to go. Please, fellow Dems, don’t think everyone is just being brainwashed. Do your research right. Don’t make assumptions. I did my research. I started a web site: FairTax4all.com. Again, don’t keep the “poor” mentality and be suspicious, until you really look into this Legislation, OK?

By Debbie DuBois

April 23, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this

I fully support the FairTax and I happen to be a Democrat! This is not a Republican issue, this is an American issue. I am voting Barack Obama for President, but I still believe the FairTax is the best way to go. Please, fellow Dems, don’t think everyone is just being brainwashed. Do your research right. Don’t make assumptions. I did my research. I started a web site: FairTax4all.com. Again, don’t keep the “poor” mentality and be suspicious, until you really look into this Legislation, OK?

By Filbert

April 23, 2007 2:32 PM | Link to this

One small item to poke a hole in Bookman’s position involves the substantial economy of illegals. Currently, very few (I’ll grant there may be a couple in the ocuntry) illegals pay income tax, and since they are paid as 1099 independent contractors it’s their responsibility and duty to file and pay same. If you think that happens I’ve got some swamp land right next to Sonny’s to sell. So, by imposing the 23% flat tax, illegals would pay the same 23% sales tax because everyone, and I mean everyone, consumes whether they have a legit income or not. Make more money, consume more. So we would not have to rely on their honesty in filing taxes, we’d just get it fromthem the same as we do from everyone else. 23% across the board. Buy a truck, 23%. Buy food, 23%, and so on. And, as Bookman acknowledges, there are provisions which provide a “relief” check to famailies and individuals making less that a set amount. Only requirement would probably be that such individuals would have to file something to prove their eligibility which once again would leave a lot of illegals out. Might even discourage them from coming and staying. It’s not a hard concept to grasp but to someone of the liberal elite who think they have to look our for the masses cause we’re too stupid to make our own decisions it takes away many of the Democrats incentives for keeping its uninformed party base in check. Hmmm, no preferential set asides, no minority tax breaks, no this, no that. Might result in people actually thinking for themsleves and then, gasp, dare we say it, they might vote Republican????

By Dave

April 23, 2007 2:32 PM | Link to this

In response to John:

You are making the assumption that EVERYTHING proposed in socialism is BAD. It is not, as can be shown by Universal Health Care that gives the poor man equal access to medical care that will save his life even if he cannot afford it. But I digress…

I defend the current tax system because, overly complex or not, it DOES tax those who DO have the money and, further, who have a VESTED INTEREST to continue to pay. While the wealthy will complain about unequal tax burdens, deep down they recognize that their failure to pay would result in them losing the nice lifestyle they have worked so hard to achieve and which allows them to be able to afford to pay the taxes in the first place. This applies even if the IRS did not have the power of government to enforce the tax code, because failure to pay taxes would inevitably result in the breakdown in society as we know it, and would eventually lead to anarchy. So goes the cliché “Taxes is the price we pay for civilization”.

The debate is before us: DO we implement a “EQUAL” tax system that is, in fact, inequitable in the treatment of the poor or, even worse, the middle class? Think about it!

By aldread

April 23, 2007 2:34 PM | Link to this

lopro, (or is it McCarthy?)

I’m hardly advocating communism, but that was a good ploy, and I’m sure it fooled many people. I’m merelyt advocating the retaining of our current progressive income tax, instead of a totally regressive flat tax.

I applaud your hopes to become wealty someday, just don’t do it on the backs of other hard working people.

While your concept of a wealthy persons “nirvana”, where the rich can live virtually tax free, might sound inviting to you, it should scare the rest of us.

By T

April 23, 2007 2:36 PM | Link to this

Jay I for one am very tired of paying more than my fair share. Why should’t everyone bear responsibility for taxes?

T

By meeeee

April 23, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this

You make the money saved sound like such a bad thing like the wealthier get higher tax savings. But thats only because they were paying higher taxes to begin with. Also the money will come in by sales tax. In Chattanooga, Sales tax is higher because of no income tax.

By Filbert

April 23, 2007 2:39 PM | Link to this

Steve - hilarious. Jay is right - yes, illegals are taxed, at the same 6-7% as are we all. So if that tax jumps to 23%, think maybe that extra 17-16% tax just might bring in some extra bucks?

By Joe L

April 23, 2007 2:40 PM | Link to this

There are a couple glaring holes with the entire illegals argument. One, these same people will talk about all the voter fraud these people commit with appropriated SSNs. If they have SSNs they are paying into the system and taking no benefits out - they are actually a source of income. Second, if people are already part of an illegal subculture why won’t they just participate in the black market which will have heavy incentives to exist? So what money they do pump into our current system will disappear completely.

By meeeee

April 23, 2007 2:40 PM | Link to this

Mad Dog, you say that if people don’t make money/spend money then they don’t pay taxes. How would that person survive? They’re not all farmers.

By Debbie DuBois

April 23, 2007 2:44 PM | Link to this

Maybe I got the numbers distorted and that makes me as bad as Bookman, I understand. But I do know a heck of a lot of people who don’t pay taxes. That includes all those individuals who are paid in cash and not claiming all their income. The rest of us are footing the bill so that someone, who doesn’t make much money anyways, won’t be taxed. Give me a break. What about drug dealers, illegal aliens and all the foreign visitors in our country each day who spend money…they aren’t contributing to our tax system now, but would under the FairTax. You opponents may have a point about black market goods…but for cryin’ out loud. At least we’d know when they raise/lower (yeah right) the tax rate. Right now, they just stick it to us silently, in the cost of all the goods we buy AND out of our paychecks. Do you know how much we are really being taxed? Do you know who ISN’T paying taxes right now? With a transparent system like The FairTax, we’d know. It’s on the receipt we get at the register. It may be the only chance the American people have to get some of their power back. We pass the FairTax first and then get government to control spending. We need this for our economy guys…Why not become the world’s leading tax haven. Let’s get some of those rich people bringing their money back home. You honestly don’t think they’ll pay sales tax on something? They’ll shop in Canada? For goodness sake. These people will pay the same they’re paying now for their goods…I just don’t understand you Dems who don’t get it…talk about brainwashed. Here is one sane Democrat!

By tepatl

April 23, 2007 2:51 PM | Link to this

Hey sansho1- I am in awe of your great math skills. You said something costs a dollar. After 23% tax, that makes it $1.30? $1.00 plus $.23 = $1.30? Great gov’t school you went to huh?

By Marie

April 23, 2007 2:51 PM | Link to this

For the deputy editor of a “leading” newspaper to call proponents of the FairTax a cult automatically shows his bias. Can you please Jay explain to all of us what is just and fair about the current system before you knock Linder, Boortz, and others for proposing an alternative? That’s the problem with YOU LIBERALS — you never have any original ideas of your own; all you can ever do is bash, bash, bash, trash, trash, trash the ideas of Libertarians or Conservatives who have creative ideas for solving the problems we face in this country.

Finally, Mr. Bookman I’ll be waiting with baited breath when your write that editorial calling the global warming enthusiasts a CULT.

By Phil

April 23, 2007 2:52 PM | Link to this

Who is it that decides what my “fair share” is anyway?

By Jay is right!

April 23, 2007 2:52 PM | Link to this

Debbie —

With all due respect, you yourself should do more research. Look for independent sources, not phony statistics made up or paid for by the FairTax proponents.

You should start by reading William Gale’s analysis of the FairTax in the May 15, 2005 edition of Tax Notes magazine (i.e., three months before the Boortz/Linder book was published).

Next you should read chapter 9 of the report of the President’s Tax Reform Commission, which is entirely devoted to the FairTax and the problems with it.

You should look up some of the writings of Dale Jorgenson of Harvard and Jim Poterba of MIT to see what they think of the FairTax. (Here’s a clue: They’re against it.)

Finally, closely examine some of the writings of the one mainstream economist who actually supports the FairTax — Laurence Kotlikoff of Boston University. You will see that even he knows that the whole “embedded taxes” notion is nonsense. The post-tax price of goods and services will increase by whatever the FairTax rate is (at a tax-exclusive rate). He also recognizes that the whole notion of the FairTax suddenly taxing the underground economy and illegal immigrants is nonsense.

So, with all do respect, please do some independent research and post it on your website.

By Dave

April 23, 2007 2:53 PM | Link to this

The hidden taxes would no longer be paid. The ones used for manufacture. Corporations would end up paying more because of costs associated with purchasing materials. This difference would be where the extra comes from.

By Joe L

April 23, 2007 2:56 PM | Link to this

Actually there’s an infinitely easier and less painful solution - get rid off deductions. We can keep our current progressive tax system, lower the tax rates across the board, and dispose of all deductions.

By Joe L

April 23, 2007 3:02 PM | Link to this

“Corporations would end up paying more because of costs associated with purchasing materials.”

So if corporations are paying approx. 15% more for every good they purchase how exactly are prices going to fall (which is another plank in the consumption tax platform)?

By Burpman Fisher

April 23, 2007 3:03 PM | Link to this

Bookman, you ignorant little whippersnapper, at least read the book you’re going to review. I spend time reading this book during my morning ablutions, and you would learn a lot if you would do the same.

By sansho1

April 23, 2007 3:04 PM | Link to this

tepati, go read my post again. If you think my math is wrong, then read it again. Repeat as necessary until you understand. I did indeed go to a public school, where it was found that repetition usually resulted in learning. Usually.

By Jay is right!

April 23, 2007 3:05 PM | Link to this

I hate to pop everyone’s balloon, but the FairTax will not collect any more revenue from illegal immigrants or the underground economy than our current system does. Here’s an example.

Under the FairTax, a drug dealer will not collect or remit the FairTax on the drugs he sales. But when he buys a Cadillac, the Cadillac dealer will collect the FairTax on the sale and remit that to the government. Fair Enough.

Under our current income tax system. The drug dealer will not report or pay income taxes on the profit he derives from the drugs he sales. But when he buys his Cadillac, the Cadillac dealer will need to report and pay tax on the income it derived from the sale. (As will the car salesman, the manufacturer, etc. This is the so-called “embedded taxes” we are currently paying.)

So, under the FairTax system, the drug dealer (and the illegal immigrants and the rest of the “underground economy”) will be taxed just as they are under our current system: when the make their purchases.

Just thought you’d like to know.

By Joseph Norman

April 23, 2007 3:05 PM | Link to this

Bookman suffers from the malady that infects the minds of all liberals. He is SMARTER than I am, so HE knows better than I DO what to do with MY money!

Guess what smart guy….You aren’t, you don’t, and you and your ilk had best begin to understand that I EARNED THE BLOODY MONEY and I know how best to spend it! I don’t need you or any of your social engineer, do-good pals to take care of me! LEAVE ME ALONE!! Let me earn my money, pay my fair share, and spend the rest as I see fit! So DON”T TREAD ON ME!!

By Debbie DuBois

April 23, 2007 3:16 PM | Link to this

One last comment before I sign off…If this legislation is so Pro-Rich, and the rich have all the power, how come it’s not flying through Congress for approval by the President himself next week? How come corporate lobbyists and special interests are the main opponents if this bill? If you can answer those questions, you might question if The FairTax is a really conspiracy against the poor or the average American’s last chance to get their power back…

By Political Mongrel

April 23, 2007 3:19 PM | Link to this

Okay “FairTax” experts, please answer these questions: when people and firms outside the US buy goods from within the US, do they pay this tax? When US firms buy goods from outside the US, do they pay tax or tariffs when they bring it into the US?

If the answer to the first is yes and the second is no, our trade deficit will be miles higher than it is now. It would be good for us, but terrible for foreigners to buy anything from the US.

By will c

April 23, 2007 3:19 PM | Link to this

The Fair Tax proposal replaces the current system which is difficult for the average person to understand and eliminates the need for an IRS department. I support the proposal. If you give individuals more money in tax savings, they will spend it on products that generate new jobs instead of it being wasted by politicians in Washington.

Rich Guys Trophy Wife http://www.richguystrophywife.com

By Oldtimer

April 23, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this

AJC-I would go further and advocate abolishing the “Income Tax” and the others altogether. Every cash register is a computer. They can be programmed to exempt staple foods, prescription drugs, etc; apply luxury assessment for those items and any other special circumstance. I would have the Government pay the merchant a percentage stipend for their collection service for the Government, not unlike the Lottery does.

Paying taxes should be painless,not subject to penalties and prosecution. The dedicated public servants now in the Internal Revenue Service would handle audits and other related services and relieve them of police type duties.

I have read publications that estimate that probably a much as 40% of the gross nation product is “off the books” or “underground economy”. A consumption tax would capture revenue on most of this activity. Additional revenue of this magnitude would go a long way in paying the National Debt.

By Sad But True

April 23, 2007 3:22 PM | Link to this

As a supporter of the fair tax and a firm believer that my income should not be redistributed to those who made different life decisions than I, I am saddened to see that this bill will probably not pass. I went to a government school, a fairly liberal undergraduate college, a few years of graduate school, and a few years of working my tail off. I am now able to enjoy a few spoils if you will. When I look at how much the few pay in income taxes vs the many, it litterally sickens me. What is fair indeed.

By Political Mongrel

April 23, 2007 3:26 PM | Link to this

**”In 2005, a panel appointed by President Bush to study proposed changes in the federal tax system reached the same conclusion, though its process was more sophisticated. It found that eliminating just the federal income tax — leaving payroll taxes, estate taxes and gift taxes in place — would require a retail sales tax of at least 34 percent. As it noted, “no state or country has ever levied a retail sales tax at a tax rate that even approaches the 34 percent required to replace the federal income tax system.”

The panel also reported that replacing the income tax with a 34 percent sales tax would reduce taxes on just two groups — households making more than $200,000, and those making less than $30,000. For everyone else, the tax burden would increase.”**

Not a single one of the name-callers who have lambasted Bookman has addressed this issue (at least that I’ve seen). They’ve griped about his not reading the book; I wonder how many of these geniuses read his whole column and noted all of his arguments. I’d be surprised if it was many. Hypocrites.

By Koz

April 23, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this

Just thought you’d like to know.

Yes they will all be taxed the same way they are now but at a higher rate. Duh.

By Jay is right!

April 23, 2007 3:31 PM | Link to this

Debbie — What makes you think that corporate lobbyists and special interests are the main opponents of the FairTax bill? Just because Boortz says so doesn’t make it true.

By Scooter

April 23, 2007 3:39 PM | Link to this

Mr. Boortz and Linder have misrepresented the FairTax by saying prices would fall to current levels and we would receive all of our paychecks. Bookman flirted with this but just wasn’t sharp enough to put his finger on the problem, no surprise there. Either prices will go down or you will receive your full paycheck, but either way; the producers savings can only be used to reduce prices or increase pay, not both.

I have researched the FairTax for six years now and this is the only real “downside” I have found. Given the potential benefits and transparency of the plan I am still an ardent supporter.

Equal protection under the law must not apply to tax law?

By Debbie DuBois

April 23, 2007 3:45 PM | Link to this

Jay…If I’m not right about the opponents to the FairTax, then how come this wasn’t passed along time ago? The idea has been around for over 30 years. The rich being so all powerful, and all. Who is standing in the way?

Anyways, it’s obvious a lot of you that have responded here just hate Neal Boortz. I don’t much like him either. My husband, another Dem, is a strong, anti-Boortz individual. But, he still supports the FairTax. And, so do I.

By Kyle

April 23, 2007 3:55 PM | Link to this

someone mentioned that everyone should recieve health care, even those that cannot pay for it. and that the same principal leads into taxation. Why is that? I mean, if you cant affort health care, get a better job. I put myself though undergrad and grad school and I am better for it. Now why cant everyone do so? I went to one of the worse high schools around and yet I seem to be doing ok now. Nothing should be given to anyone! Yes, this means the poor should be left to fend for themselves. Free will charity is a good thing, but when the govt tells me I HAVE to pay for the stupid girl down the road with 5 kids and all from a differet Daddy then that isnt Fair at all!!!!

By GenXDen

April 23, 2007 3:58 PM | Link to this

@jeff…is there a reason you’re trying to call me out in a response? I think you may have misread something somewhere in this blog. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. Just thought you may want to know so that you can direct your commentary at the appropriate individual. I was the one who knew he needed to learn more about it and didn’t express an opinion.

OH….When did I say I was an accountant? I’m not!

By luxomni

April 23, 2007 4:02 PM | Link to this

Bookman is an idiot or a liar or both. Having read a few of his columns in the past, I’m going with “or both.”

Just another reason not to pay for this pathetic liberal rag.

By MarkP

April 23, 2007 4:04 PM | Link to this

For all the bluster of the “Fair Tax” proponents, and their dismissal of Mr. Bookman’s premise, I have yet to see anyone respond to his actual question. Instead, beyond their advice to “read the book”, their logic seems to assume that: A. Certain people out there, unhappy with the extra income they would have in their paychecks (from not paying as many income taxes) will surrender the extra income to make purchases, and therefore pay more taxes than they do now. Huh??? B. That the (near) elimination of the IRS would somehow in itself relieve a lot of tax burden. Again: Huh??? The IRS (and other government agencies) is no less efficient than the overhead of most private corporations, those holy can-do-no-wrong shrines of the Fair Tax folks. Ever heard of SG&A? Check it out as a percentage of a company’s revenues, then compare with the entire budget of the IRS compared with the value of government services. You can even use the most curmudgeonly Fair Tax view of the value of government services, I guarantee that the IRS is more efficient. One last note: Anyone that’s actually read the Fair Tax book, and done any critical thinking and actually kept track of the claims made therein, will realize that there is plenty of sleight of hand with the numbers cited, specifically whenever percentages are noted. Here’s an example with simplified math, via the logic of the Fair Tax authors: You buy something for $10. You pay $1 in “Fair Taxes.” Your tax rate? In the Fair Tax world, it’s 9.1%, which is one dollar divided by 11, the total amnount spent. Naturally, when they talk about the existing “Unfair” tax systems, they revert to the numbers based in reality. This is worse than using statistics to say anything, it’s “lying by number.”

By Jay is right!

April 23, 2007 4:09 PM | Link to this

Debbie — I apologize if I questioned your motives or your commitment to tax reform. I have been frustrated for years by some of what I consider intentional misrepresentations of the FairTax by its proponents. I shouldn’t have put you in that category.

The FairTax hasn’t been around for 30 years. It was originally developed around 13 years ago in Houston. Former Congressman Bill Archer of Houston (who became chairman of the Ways and Means Committee when the Republican’s took over in ‘94) was a big supporter of a consumption tax, including the FairTax, for very valid reasons, including the ones I’m sure you agree with (i.e. undue lobbying influence in out current system; the unbelievable commplexity, etc.) So, when he was chairperson of the Ways and Means Committee, he had the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation examine the FairTax as an alternative to the current Tax Code.

The JCT concluded in 1998 that a tax rate of 57% would be required in order for the FairTax to be revenue neutral. After Archer retired, the JCT did another study in 2000 and came up with much the same result. After that, you didn’t hear much about the FairTax until Boortz started talking about it on his show (and ignoring all of the studies and arguments against the FairTax).

Why haven’t the rich pused the bill through? Well, in the first place, not many rich folks are greedy enough (or stupid enough) to throw too much money behind a bill that has little chance of passing and would devistate the American economy if it did. But the FairTax does have a number of wealthy backers, including those in Houston that started it. Also, many of the ultra-right-wing rich spent millions and millions to kill the estate tax, which they thought was much more likely than passing the FairTax. (And they came within one or two votes in the Senate of doing just that.) Since the FairTax would also eliminate the estate tax, you might see some of these folks shift their allegiance (and dollars) to passing the FairTax. AFFT claims to be raising $70 million to lobby for the FairTax. I doubt that most of that is going to come from regular folks like you. If they succeed in raising that much money, fireworks will really start flying.

Again, I apologize if I insulted you. I like your website. You might add a section addressing reasonale arguments against the FairTax.

Regards.

By Matthew Nystrom

April 23, 2007 4:09 PM | Link to this

Let’s see, who should we listen to for your required “data”?

We have a tax panel led by power hungry politicians who profit from a complicated tax code where they can create thousands of loopholes for their rich contributors.

There’s the middle aged opinion columnist at the AJC who’s comments about the Fair Tax indicate that he has not actually read the legislation or The Fair Tax Book. What tools and knowledge of advanced economics does he have? Ah yes. A calculator. Ooooh.

Or we have a team of economists with the only goal of achieving a tax collection system with the most positive economic impact on the country. These are not “cult members” who examined The Fair Tax, drank the Kool-Aid and pronounced it acceptable. They created The Fair Tax. From scratch. Having unlimited options as to what they could propose, this was the decision.

Given those choices for your data, as much as I really like the folksy charm of having the opinion columnist with a calculator come up with global economic policy, I’m thinking that we should listen to the Harvard economics professors.

And yes, being passionate about changing the world will look like a cult. I’m sure King George thought that whole “Sons of Liberty” nonsense was just a passing phase for a few hotheaded miscreants inducted into the Freedom Cult.

Matthew N., Cult member! Kennesaw, GA

By modest

April 23, 2007 4:21 PM | Link to this

I have never seen so much love given to the government and their socialist plan to steal money that I work for. All the suporters for keeping things they way they are. I say thanks for letting the government take a forced interest free loan from me every two weeks! And no I am not some fat cat. I work 40 hours a week and go to school full time. How dare you say I should not have my money that I work my butt of for!!

By Syd

April 23, 2007 4:55 PM | Link to this

Roy…nice cut and paste job. Try an original thought.

By Getitright

April 23, 2007 4:58 PM | Link to this

Bookman, you idiot! How can you expect to understand something if you don’t research it. Read the book. Quit taking your opinions from the socialists at the DNC and do something good for a change. Read.

By tim

April 23, 2007 5:00 PM | Link to this

Wow, sorry we can’t debate without being so rude. I know we all feel strongly (and I put some pretty strong language in my initial retort) but names and derogatory remarks are unnecessary and lessen the effectiveness of your argument.

Skimming through, a couple of quick points:

Hank mentioned gas tax and a few other “add on” taxes that might not go away. Well, they exist today IN ADDITION to your current income tax situation. We are talking about abolishing income taxes. The add on taxes are completely separate. If some go away, hallelujah but no one suggested they would. Their presence is not even relevant to this conversation.

Jay had a well structured conversation relating to tax preparation, the IRS abolishment and black market for goods that are taxable under the new proposed fair tax program (the black market has actually been mentioned quite often). I disagree and have had this debate many times. We currently have a system to monitor and collect sales taxes. Actually, it is duplicative between our federal, state and local governments (just more waste). Will it get more difficult? Absolutely. Will people try to dodge it, get around it, form a black market? Absolutely. Will it be easier to police than our current system? Absolutely. It is not complex. Enforcement is fairly black and white. Do people get around our current tax system? All the time and we pay big bucks to try and enforce that. It is extremely subjective and there are statistics (I should research exact numbers before quoting because I know I will get blasted for estimating) that show 100 tax professionals were given the same, mildly complex tax scenario and asked to prepare a tax return and the result were 95 different tax returns. So, if we can aim a laser light on enforcing a non-complex system of taxation, isn’t that infinitely more effective and gets rid of an enormous amount of waste (wasted tax dollars to be exact).

By Craig

April 23, 2007 5:06 PM | Link to this

Amazing that all you cultists can do nothing other than regurgitate what Neal has put into your mushy little brains. “read the book” “government schools” “embedded taxes” Try thinking for yourself… oh wait, this is Georgia… guess that’s a silly suggestion.

By DLandry

April 23, 2007 5:07 PM | Link to this

Mr. Bookman is incapable of rational thought and only spews out of his mouth what he hears from his fellow bed wetters! Until he has read the fair tax book as I have, I will not grace him with any further commentary.

By viktor

April 23, 2007 5:11 PM | Link to this

Bookman’s sure to get a Pulitzer for this BS.

By G-Man

April 23, 2007 5:14 PM | Link to this

More questions about the fair tax:

By DLandry

April 23, 2007 5:17 PM | Link to this

Obviously Craig is a member of the bed wetters club along with Mr. Bookman.

By sam

April 23, 2007 5:32 PM | Link to this

It is very obvious that you have NOT read the book, have decided to lie, or, just don’t want to expend any more energy than you have to. The FairTax will remove ALL the tax burden from the poor. Why are you so jealous of the rich? They provide your JOB.

By MarkP

April 23, 2007 5:43 PM | Link to this

After making my post I noticed that RoY is regurgitating the same quirky math espoused by Boortz et al. in the Fair Tax book. the 30% tax referenced by Bookman, is, in fact, the same 30% that would be referenced by most of us in common English (and mathematical conventions.) I.e., you buy something for $10, pay $3 in tax. Most of us consider that a 30% tax. The Fair Tax legions calculate it as 23% by dividing $3 by $13 instead of $10. That’s fine if you can convince everyone in the world to start thinking of things in the same way (a 15% tip would become a 13% tip, those who tithe would only need to give up 9% instead of 10%.) Given the success of the metric system in this country I don’t think the Fair Tax lobby actually believes they can change the way people calculate tax rates, which leads me to believe they’re just disingenuous. There may in fact be ways to improve the tax system, but the credibility of the “Fair Tax” advocates is gone.

By Eric

April 23, 2007 6:24 PM | Link to this

If the IRS goes away, who makes sure the tax dollars get collected? Can you kool-aid drinkers say “massive tax evasion”?

By Tony

April 23, 2007 6:47 PM | Link to this

Man Brootz followers get nasty, no facts just nasty. I read the book and I lean to the right. People this is a screwing waiting to happen. Used items arent taxed, so what do you think is going to happen to the used market? Come on now think for yourself. Also companies automatically aren’t going to lower their prices if their cost of goods rises. This is common sense, I think many are blinded by the sound of I get to keep all of my paycheck. I dont mind paying taxes. Its because I live in America, I had the chance to do well in my life and compared to other country first world countries Im getting off cheap.

By Ken Howe

April 23, 2007 6:48 PM | Link to this

Jay Bookman needs to stop re-writing the FairTax before he writes on it again. He does the same thing the Tax Commission did, he altered it to make his opposition seem stronger than it is. Jay Bookman does not understand of what he writes. Jay Bookman should not be writing in an editorial capacity, he should be writing on restroom walls where his ideas belong.

By ACB

April 23, 2007 7:51 PM | Link to this

Here’s who pays more - everyone who DOESN’T pay anything now, but still manages to spend money on things other than poverty-level necessities. Like the drug dealer who drives a Lexus.

By Keith

April 23, 2007 8:29 PM | Link to this

You ask “Who Pays more”? Let’s start with illegal immigrants, day laborers, drug dealers, prostitutes and anyone else who gets paid in cash and “forgets” to report it to the IRS. Next we have tourists visiting our shores and purchasing anything in our country and the millions of people that will have new, higher paying jobs that emerge as thousands of corporations move their factories and corporate headquarters back to the USA.

By Endorph

April 23, 2007 8:31 PM | Link to this

The tax code is supposed to be used as a means to raise money for the operation of government services. It is not supposed to be a means to punish the wealthy for their evil success or reward people who install solar panels on their roofs. The very idea of using the tax code to modify behavior is a basic facet of Karl Marx.

By Keith

April 23, 2007 8:32 PM | Link to this

The Fairtax rewards productivity and places the penalty on consumption. This encourages people to save.

By Keith

April 23, 2007 8:34 PM | Link to this

The Prebate (which is paid to EVERY legal resident of the US) pre-pays every penny of taxes that you would be expected to pay if you were living at the “poverty level”. This is MORE progressive than the current system. The “POOR” will pay taxes at the register but since they are getting a pre-payment of those taxes they have a zero effective tax rate. Also Anyone who is not in this country legally will not be entitled to the prebate so they will have to pay 23% from the first dollar that they spend.

By Keith

April 23, 2007 8:44 PM | Link to this

MarkP: The cost of compliance with the current tax system is well over 250 Billion Dollars per year; some estimates place this figure over 400 Billion per year.

The operational cost of the IRS is over 6 Billion Dollars per year and the estimated “tax gap” (the amount of money the IRS believes is owed vs: what is actually taken in revenue) is $500 Billion per year.

Elimation of the Income Tax would not completly eliminate tax cheating but it would be considerably more difficult to evade taxes and the enforcement agency would have fewer people to audit.

By Keith

April 23, 2007 8:49 PM | Link to this

Under Our Current tax system every item manufactured in the US and every service provided is currently taxed during production.

Whenever a US company ships a widget overseas that production tax is not eliminated from the widget.

Whenever a FOREIGN company ships a widget INTO the US that production tax is NOT applied to the widget.

Moving the basis for taxation from production to consumption makes US manufactured widgets more competitive in the US and overseas.

Jay; Did you even TAKE an economics class in high school?

By Endorph

April 23, 2007 9:03 PM | Link to this

MarkP

In comparing the FairTax rate against the current Income Tax rates we quote the FairTax “inclusively” because that is how the Income Tax is always quoted.

There is nothing “disingenuous” about it. I really don’t care which way the rate is quoted as long as they are quoted using the same terms.

By James Eames

April 23, 2007 9:33 PM | Link to this

Hey Tony Cost of goods would go down not up because theres already taxes embeded in the goods and services You buy about 22%. I dont understand whats wrong with making lots of money. Everyone wants as much as they can but are jealous of everyone else who did/do get it. I dont make over $40,000yr but could care less if my president makes $500,000 a term. If I could I would. You know you would too. Also Middle class income is a lot higher these days then everyone thinks. Im interested to know just how much this editor makes a yr as Im sure its more then most of use are making actually doing our jobs and not pretending.

We all know how Democrates feel about money. Even Hillary clinton said she wanted to TAKE the profits of the oil companys when I think it was exxon that reported largest profit margins ever. ITS NOT HER MONEY, or the governments. If you take there money why o why will they stay here to do business? They will only increase prices more! If they stay

I like the point about the illegals haveing to register in order to get the prebate of they are just paying more into the system. A WIN, WIN. This really only makes since.

By Don Williamson

April 23, 2007 9:45 PM | Link to this

Since the author is so knowledgable about The Fair Tax, I think he should debate the issue in a public forum. The gauntlet is down and all Mr. Bookman has to do is pick it up. Somehow I feel that he will cower behind his writings rather than oralize his arguments, just like most of our politicians!

By sansho1

April 23, 2007 10:06 PM | Link to this

Keith, since you seem so up on the Fair Tax, what are your feelings about the fact that the tax rate would be 30 percent, not 23 percent as they would have you believe.

Here’s another 7th grade math problem for you Fair Taxers. By what percentage is 30% greater than 23%?

The answer is 30.4%. If you got this right, or even if you understand how percentages work, please stick around and continue the debate. If not, please return to your radio.

By Boodle

April 23, 2007 10:37 PM | Link to this

Bookman,

I always thought you were not very smart… now you have opened your mouth to prove it.

Read the book!

By atlatinpiano

April 23, 2007 11:26 PM | Link to this

Russell,

Well said. I wonder what Jay’s foot tastes like. “Fair-ly” stinky—just like his ignorant article.

By ripkelly

April 23, 2007 11:36 PM | Link to this

amazing bunch here in the good ‘ole usa.

everybody is so greedy. money money money. that is all anybody can think of. heaven forbid we dwell on things that’ll matter in eternity. but i digress…

proponents of fairtax have an angle. rather simple: shift the tax burden to somebody else. why? ‘cause everybody is greedy and wants “stuff”. well, collectively, we, as a nation, have more “stuff” than any other place on globe. but that ain’t enough. we still want more “stuff”. amazing really.

last time i checked we’ve been running a national debt since at least the early-mid 1800’s. we’ve needed and still need to elect politicians that will truly limit spending and reduce taxes all around stop complaining about how much tax you pay. but with 300 million or so folks always demanding “stuff”, that costs money to keep everything in check.

regardless, think of all the things we take for granted that are funded by federal tax dollars. such a small percentage goes to “social” programs such as welfare, so don’t go jumpin’ all over “income redistribution” and the such. our military (you know the one, the one that keeps you safe every night from the unstable world), federal law enforcement (atf, fbi, cia), natural resource agencies (both regulatory and stewardship such as national park service, us forest service, epa, noaa, etc…), federal highway administration, human health service, cdc, department of agriculture, nasa, irs, and so on cost money.

so, stop complaining and be thankful that we live in the finest and greatest country that has ever existed. be thankful that our government provides us with all of the services necessary for a quality life that we take for granted day in and day out. can you imagine not having clean water? how about an hiv rate at better than 50%? how about no national forests or no national parks? how about no interstate system? how about an unregulated food supply? how about anarchy on the streets?

i’m glad to pay taxes. heck, looking at the rest of the world 30%, 40%, or even approaching 50% of my income is really cheap all things considered. ‘cause without service provided by a stable government, all the “stuff” in the world wouldn’t matter a bit. but maybe that is what we as a nation need. some really hard times like in the great depression. that would put our desire for “stuff” in check pretty quick.

By Keith

April 24, 2007 6:11 AM | Link to this

sansho1.

23% INCLUSIVE is exactly the same as 30% EXCLUSIVE. You are obviously either not understanding the concept of inclusive vs. exclusive taxation or are intentionally distorting the truth. Take a class in basic economics. The INCOME TAX that we all pay now is always quoted as an INCLUSIVE rate. That is why the FairTax is always quoted as an Inclusive rate. We are comparing it to the INCOME TAX not to the EXCLUSIVE Sales Tax that your state and local governments charge.

The rate that FairTax needs to be is “revenue neutral” with the current system of taxation. Personally I don’t care one bit about what that revenue neutral rate needs to be. If the rate NEEDS to be 80% to fund the governments bloated beauracracy then let the rate be 80%. I HOPE American’s will get a desperatly needed wakeup call and begin to demand that their congressman cut the outrageous cost of government. We went to war over a tax of less than 3% on a luxury item that only the wealthiest Americans could afford in the first place, Now the Federal Government taxes most of us over 15% (Don’t forget to include your Social Security and Medicare withholdings when determining your federal tax bite; Remember that FairTax replaces those withholdings as well) and some of us are taxed well over 50%. That is insane. Our current system of taxation destroys jobs in this economy, encourages businesses to relocate overseas and punishes people for being succesful. It’s about time the American Citizens woke up and demanded our government reign itself in. The “Evil Rich” that some of you seem to hate so much are the very people that create the jobs and the economic prosperity that we have enjoyed so much throughout our lifetimes.

But FairTax is NOT a debate about the cost of government or what the appropriate role is for that spending. The FairTax is quoted as revenue neutral. There is no reason to muddle the discussion regarding our method of raising revenue by adding to it our complaints about the out of control spending by the elected tyrants in DC.

By Do you see it

April 24, 2007 8:05 AM | Link to this

Ever noticed how “progressives” always seem to preserve the status quo, unless it transfers powers to the government to chase some arbitrary goal. Experience should have shown us that politicians will always move the goal posts to preserve their grips on power – but what do I know right?

I know the FairTax would end most of the corporate lobbyist jockeying our politicians to hide tax favors within the 60,000 page labyrinth of a tax code we currently have. Doesn’t the corporate lobby lead this country toward fascism and aren’t we all scared of fascism?

Does individual liberty sell more than telling people you will use the confiscatory powers of government to disproportionately steal money from one group in order to rain another group with entitlements? I fear too many people have been sucking on the government teet too long to give it up now.

By Chopdawg

April 24, 2007 8:10 AM | Link to this

Instead of wasting time bashing Bookman (altho I do admit that’s fun sometimes), I wish some of you FairTax proponents would calm down and quote some sort of quickie chart explaining how exactly the FairTax will work. I work two jobs & don’t have much time for reading books. It’s hard for me to imagine the IRS being disbanded (after all, SOMEBODY’s got to collect this huge sales tax, won’t that be the IRS?). It’s also hard to understand how the economy will improve, because of the psychology of paying a huge tax at the time of every purchase (I mean, won’t that make people think REALLY HARD about every little thing they buy? I’m having enuf of a problem with the tax in my county, that just went to 7%.)

By John Crewdson

April 24, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this

Jay,

Thank you for your comments regarding the FairTax. I am a supporter of the FairTax and have spent quite a lot of time over the past 3 plus years looking at as many sides to this proposal as I can find. Every argument I’ve seen against it appears to be poorly informed, yours included.

First of all corporations have never really pay taxes, individuals pay taxes. Corporations are business and have to pass along all business related expenses in order to remain profitable. You appear to have fallen for one of the oldest tricks of our politicians. They say “let’s raise taxes on corporations”, implying - ‘so you poor citizens won’t have to pay for your own services’. It’s nothing more than smoke and mirrors. No one seems to know how much we really pay because a very large percentage of the taxes we pay are hidden.

Secondly, you’ve left the cost of tax compliance out of the equation, not to mention the fact that the tax base would be greatly enlarged under the FairTax. Illegal immigrants, the underground economy and visitors to our Country would also be paying taxes. Do you think it’s possible that this could actually reduce taxes for most of us?

This bill has more research behind it, including prominent economists, than any other bill I’m aware of and I’m sure an open debate will show the errors in your argument. Thank you for helping to bring this debate out into the open.

By steve keller

April 24, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this

I’ve been a FairTax supporter for a number of years. It has become very obvious as to who is against the FairTax. Here is the list. IRS employees, wealthy tax lawyers, illegal aliens, wealthy individuals who are able to use “for the wealthy only loopholes”, drug dealers, tax lobbyist, and all those who cheat on or don’t even bother to file their tax income tax returns. If you are against the FairTax and you don’t fall into one of these categories, you are either ignorant, stupid or you have been brainwashed by one of the above.

By Jon

April 24, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this

To MarkP:

Can you tell me the tax rate (percentage) you paid this year on income? Is this exclusive or inclusive? Show me you know the difference in how sales tax and income tax rates are calculated. Of course, you are probably one of those who would say “I didn’t pay any taxes, I got XX$ of dollars back!!!”

By Lady B

April 24, 2007 3:46 PM | Link to this

Chop dawg - if you only read the added chapter in the paperback version of the FairTax book you can see a lot of the objections and the rebuttals to those objections. Gives a good overview.

I learned more about economics from the FT book than I learned in HS and one econ 101 class in college. And, it was entertaining too.

I hope that the whole FairTax issue can escape from partisan politics and be backed by some more DC powerhouse elected officials.

On another slightly related issue - Today there was an op ed about ‘Beware food ingredients from China - Says that 80 percent of the world’s vitamin C is manufactured in China. How much of our food is vitamin C enriched? If we could bring manufacturing back to the US we could be a little more sure of what is added to our food.

The FairTax will bring business back to the US and it will bring hidden off shore money back to the US.

I’m self employed. I’ve cut back on work output cause if I don’t make it I don’t have to pay tax on it.

By Lady B

April 24, 2007 3:49 PM | Link to this

Forgot to say this….

My tax preparer and I were talking and I asked her what she thought about the FairTax. She is totally for it. Tax prep is a nightmare. She would much rather be a general accountant and not have to spend hours each year learning all the latests additions to the tax code. Insanity