feminists will say it objectifies womenFUBAR24

[QUOTE="trix5817"]

[QUOTE="Famiking"]Wouldn't Fair Tax decrease spending? Given the higher increase in price of goods...Famiking

Wrong. There would not be an increase in the price of goods. With the Fair Tax, there is no more income tax on corporations and businesses. It's been estimated by economists that 22% of the money you spend on a goods goes to corporate taxes.

The idea that the Fair Tax or any value-added tax in general (with removal of the income tax) wouldn't raise the price of goods is simply absurd. Any government that has placed emphasis on a value-added tax sees the price of goods increase by roughly 10% or higher in the short run, and presumably the long run (this is a highly variable figure). The problem is that the people that drafted Fair Tax Act have turned into a political movement, which seems to produce an irrational response in people.

One thing that he touches upon, and which the Fair Tax Act addresses, is the transfer of responsibility for corporate taxation, which certainly needs to change. But this can be addressed in other ways, so it does not require the Fair Tax Act.

trix5817

You're not an economist any more than he is. Why would you criticize one of the only prominent politicians that supports the bill? Anyway, you did not mention Ron Paul, but the Fair Tax initiative was one of his primary interests during his campaign. By supporting it, and especially through politicizing your support of it, support of Ron Paul becomes implicit (now, if you had avoided words like "left" and "they" my conclusions about your character may have been different). The left and the right? You're one in a million. I have already told you this once. If you wish to have a conversation about economics with me, you should remove the political implications.

You can't recognize the similarities between Keynesian economics and the Austrian School because you don't understand economics. You clearly believe that various economic theories are mutually exclusive in relation to what they propose. This is patently incorrect.

It's not a two way street, buddy. I discuss economics, and you commit slander and express polarized political opinions. Your only reasoning has been that I don't understand the Fair Tax bill and it's relation to value-added tax, and that anyone that I may learn from, be it a professor or The Economist, are idiots.You're arguing an assertion without validation (other than the fact that you personally believe in it), then you utilize ad hominem fallacies to disparage me, my professors, and the "scholarly" research/academic journals that I read (entirely on the grounds of politics), rather than actively responding to my assertions with consideration for your supported economic theory. Do you believe that this is what discourse involves? If you want to criticize someone, or even call them an idiot, you need to back it up with something more than your emotions. Also, to use my words? I was talking about a specific politician, while you're referring to members of academia in general. How do you see a correlation between the two statements? Likewise, f your opinions are not influenced by Ron Paul, then that criticism on my part is invalid and irrelevant.

By the way, the Editor-In-Chief of The Economist predicted this as well, and he's relatively Keynesian and Neoclassicist, as did many others that don't necessarily subscribe to post-Keynesian theories such as those espoused by the Austrian School. What the hell is your point?

Consumption tax, fair tax, left, they...

That explains everything.

trix5817

Wow. So much ignorance in one post. No, I am not a Keynesian whatsover. Far from it. They're the ones who got us in this mess. I go by what the Austrian school of economics says.

Our standard of living is not low compared to other industrialized nations. I don't know where you've gotten your facts from...

And no, it has been calculated that the Fair Tax would provide enough funds for the Federal government (but not the way it's spending right now, which it shouldn't be). Money in the hands of the private sector will create a much higher standard of living and wealth than the government can even dream of.

It seems like you don't even know how the Fair Tax works and what the details are. Read please.

trix5817

The next portion is interesting. I don't need to point out that you manipulated my words, do I? There are numerous metrics used in gauging the living standards of a given nation. The one most often referred to in the U.S. is incidentally one which is inadequate and inapplicable. Under various metrics used for gauging living standards within the post-industrialized world which are for more dynamic and allow for variability, and are thus more applicable, the standard of living in the U.S. is below that of other nations (such as Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Canada), something that GDP per capita doesn't reflect. If you are as well-educated as you imply, you should know this. I also didn't miss the fact that you said "industrialized," rather than "post-industrialized." "Industrialized" now includes China, India, and Brazil. Was that a mistake or further manipulation? Interestingly, you failed to use this statement as validation for value-added taxation.

It has been calculated? I'm really tired of the political bandwagons and the type of support that they cultivate. I'm sorry, but Ron Paul is an idiot that is more interested in his political career, libertarianism, and Midwestern pluralism than a rational consideration for fiscal and monetary policy. I have read two of his books, both of which I found myself criticizing consistently for the lack of cogent arguments and borderline fallacious reasoning, and most importantly, for the unrealistic assumptions that Ron Paul and his kind espouse. A pure value-added tax places too much pressure on CPI and the marginal propensity to consume. This is simply a fact. While this can arguably be effective as the sole means of tax revenues in theory, it is not necessarily an option when you consider the circumstances of the American economy, especially in the short term. The only realistic option is to utilize a value-added tax in tandem with an income tax, or reform and increase the income tax. While future circumstances may render the income tax obsolete, that is purely conjecture. In fact, these "calculations" you speak of are soundly criticized, and said criticism is well publicized. Do the research, and stop saying "Fair Tax." It usurps the integrity of any statement that you make, because it turns your ideas into little more than political sloganeering. I give you the product of my burgeoning formal education, and you respond with "No, Ron Paul and the Austrian School says..." Thank you, because I needed someone quoting an idiot and a reactionary fringe economic theory at me.

Yes, as an economics major, I don't understand value-added tax. A statement like that makes you sound confrontational, arrogant, childish, and self-righteous. Stop posturing and have a conversation. It may include polemics, but it need not be disrespectful. I understand the finer points, all of the little ancillary factors and implications that Wikipedia, Ron Paul, and political pundits won't be able to teach you about.

Would you like to know what undermines the validity of your ideas more than anything else? Your use of the word "they." Of everything you said, this word alone undermined the integrity of your statements the most.

[QUOTE="Ace_WondersX"][QUOTE="trix5817"]

Because it will causes prices to rise on just about everything....

trix5817

Take an economics class. That's all I have to say. Don't feel like explaining this to you.

A value-added tax, or "Fair Tax" as it is so objectively referred to by it's supporters (note the sarcasm), is unrealistic without an income tax. A marginal value-added tax would be exceptional, provided the income tax rate either remains as is or is only diminished marginally. Only 40%!? You're blinded by your subconscious adherence to rigid Keynesian principles that have become ingrained within American culture. There is a reason why our average standard of living is so low compared to the rest of the post-industrial world. Anyway...I'll edit this later, my girlfriend is home.

You just sound like you complain a lot. It's hard to take you seriously given your level, post count, and username.

Where's GioVela and his BMW?AAllxxjjnn

I'm hoping he died in a fiery car crash, with blood...and sharks. Edit: Never mind. I didn't read the 4th/5th page. *dies.