HUFFINGTON POST Article

CJ, you aren't picking up on the embedded tax aspect here. Prices will remain roughly the same, even after applying the FairTax to a new purchase because the manufacturing costs decrease.

Bad argument. So what if they lease? The leasing company purchased the vehicle before they lease it out to those horrible rich folks. Hell man, I have a lease car and I damn sure ain't rich by any measure. Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

the top 2 doesnt lease many american made cars .... granted leasing a ford or a chevy = selling a car and scads of peope do exactly that, just not the big shots. Big shots arent horrible they just have a different rule book

Sounds like we mostly agree. You are right that the biggest barrier to any of this is the same group that is expected to fix it... Congress.

As for fairness on social security and medicare changes that opportunity left 30 years or more ago. I would means test existing seniors as well as future. It is not fair but I am talking about seniors with good incomes from other sources not people barely getting by. I cannot see how it is fair to tax a family struggling to get by while raising kids to pay benefits for seniors who are far better off. It is about picking the lessor of two evils. Originally Posted by Laz

I do think we mostly agree. The means testing could indeed be done, but it would be very difficult to so so fairly. I still think it is a bigger foul to change the rules significantly once it is too late for the person to realisticly react. A person retires at age XX, haveing decided that with SS he or she can live at a certain standard of living. They played completely within the rules, saved, did everything we think they should have. A year later they get told that 30% of their income will disappear (that is not a wildly out of line number), but it is too late for them to go back and get a job remotely close to what they were making. I know age descrimination is illegal, but it is still rampant.

Had they been told before they retired and had to work a couple years longer, I have far less issue. I think something that says anyone with 3 or 5 yrs of the current SS dates is uneffected for means testing, and start phasing in the age and means testing at that point would be tollerable to many.

Excellent and civil discussion, Laz and OldT. It can be done! Many good points. The only thing I would add is that in order to end the polarization in Congress, we need to eliminate the income tax. The major parties continue to use the tax code to protect and enrich their friends. It won't happen, so we're stuck with what we have. But I enjoyed your discussion, and have very little to add or criticize. Impressive! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Thanks.

My point is that SOMEONE is purchasing the new vehicle. Whether its the leasing company or the consumer is irrelevant. Unless you are taking the wealth-envy route, I'm trying to decide your perspective on that.

My point is that SOMEONE is purchasing the new vehicle. Whether its the leasing company or the consumer is irrelevant. Unless you are taking the wealth-envy route, I'm trying to decide your perspective on that. Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

no sir ... my entire argument is based strictly on 98% of the population buys more cars than 2% could ever hope to .... taxing new vs not taxing used will cripple the new car industry and drive up the prices on used cars and everything else sold used "no tax"

union made cars and trucks would be the least of the car industrys problem

That really is a stupid argument, even for you, CBJ7. In order for there to be used cars to buy, someone has to buy them new. In fact, I would expect, under the FairTax, demand for new cars would increase. People who couldn't otherwise afford them before would be able to, since they will have increased disposable income. It will all work out, and it certainly isn't an argument in favor of our current tax structure.

I wish you could understand what you read. It would really help you, both here and in your personal life.

That really is a stupid argument, even for you, CBJ7. In order for there to be used cars to buy, someone has to buy them new. In fact, I would expect, under the FairTax, demand for new cars would increase. People who couldn't otherwise afford them before would be able to, since they will have increased disposable income. It will all work out, and it certainly isn't an argument in favor of our current tax structure.

I wish you could understand what you read. It would really help you, both here and in your personal life. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

exactly ... if used sales skyrocked by middle class buyers avoinding a tax, new car production suffers long term and used car prices go higher, not cheaper


what dont you understand about supply and demand

It will balance out. How does that make our current tax structure better?

It will balance out. How does that make our current tax structure better? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

says who?

How does that make our current tax structure better than the FairTax?

How does that make our current tax structure better than the FairTax? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Ive yet to say it was better, what Im syaing is the fair tax isnt the answer

So you think that people having more money to spend, a huge increase in manufacturing in America, lower prices for our goods being exported, an increase in demand for labor driving up wages, fewer, if any, loopholes, the underground economy finally paying taxes, fewer government controls on our lives, etc. is not good for America, because someone may choose a used car over a new one?

That sounds like CBJ7 logic. What's your plan, and how is it better? If you don't have one, let's try mine. You might like it.

So you think that people having more money to spend, a huge increase in manufacturing in America, lower prices for our goods being exported, an increase in demand for labor driving up wages, fewer, if any, loopholes, the underground economy finally paying taxes, fewer government controls on our lives, etc. is not good for America, because someone may choose a used car over a new one?

That sounds like CBJ7 logic. What's your plan, and how is it better? If you don't have one, let's try mine. You might like it. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

pure speculation

Read the reports on the website. Everything is speculation before it is tried. Hell, your beloved Obamacare was pure speculation until we passed it so we could find out what is in it.

But unlike Obamacare, the FairTax bill has been public, examined by hundreds of economists, and looks very solid. Enacting the FairTax is much less of a risk than enacting your beloved Obamacare was.

Like I said, let's try it. We can always go back to this corrupt, evil system if we want to. Unless you have a better plan, which you don't.

So you think that people having more money to spend, a huge increase in manufacturing in America, lower prices for our goods being exported, an increase in demand for labor driving up wages, fewer, if any, loopholes, the underground economy finally paying taxes, fewer government controls on our lives, etc. is not good for America, because someone may choose a used car over a new one?

That sounds like CBJ7 logic. What's your plan, and how is it better? If you don't have one, let's try mine. You might like it. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

your plan?

what was it you said about plagiarism.

l8r