Huckabee is still lying about the “fairtax”

[kaz]

Well, they never intended to let non-whites become citizens either

Um...OK? Make up shit much?

 

[my2¢]

Sorry, I never heard him mention HR 25 and the tax he propose was 19%, ever thought he has a different plan?

Sounds like the same plan, the 23% percent quoted was stated in terms of how folks are use to state and local sales tax working.

A retailer needing a $100 return on an item would need to collect $123 from the customer and then give 19% of that ($23) to government.

 

[johnwk]

During the first presidential debate Mike Huckabee once again touted the fairtax proposal, and once again Mike Huckabee has lied about the “fairtax” (see H.R.25 - FairTax Act of 2015. Unfortunately our media personalities will not ask him to support his contentions about the fairtax
.
Huckabee alleges the fairtax would close down the IRS and would replace our current system with a consumption tax. But the truth is, when one takes the time to actually read and study the fairtax legislation, quite the contrary is true.

The fair tax proposes to create two new taxes, a 23 percent tax upon the sale of articles of consumption and another 23 percent tax upon the sale of labor while keeping alive Congress’ power to lay and collect taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries and other lawfully earned incomes.

In fact, Huckabee’s fairtax would create two new tax collecting agencies, an “Excise Tax Bureau” and the “Sales Tax Bureau, in addition to keeping the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms alive which will also be collecting taxes.

It should also be noted that under Huckabee’s “fairtax” ordinary working people who dare to sell the property they have in their own labor are required to register with the federal government and file federal fairtax returns under the penalty of perjury 12 times a freaken year, and they will be compelled to keep any records Congress may dream up, not to mention the threat of audits which will constantly haunt them.

It should also be noted Huckabee’s fairtax proposes to create a new entitlement called the “FAMILY CONSUMPTION ALLOWANCE” under which qualified families will receive a monthly check to pay for a rationed amount of tax free necessities of life, which in turn would make a whole new block of voters with limited economic means extremely dependent upon the federal government for a monthly subsistence check!

If Mike Huckabee were sincere in wanting to force Congress to move to a consumption tax, and end all federal taxes calculated from profits, gains and other lawfully earned “incomes”, and he really wanted to close down the IRS, he would be promoting the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment which begins with the following 32 words:


“SECTION 1. The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money.

Those words would in fact force Congress to return to a consumption based tax system (imposts, duties and excise taxes), and would actually end all federal taxes calculated from lawfully earned profits, gains and other "incomes"!

JWK




“…..with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities“. Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address

I hate when people take the fair tax and try to turn it back into what we have now

see H.R.25 - FairTax Act of 2015 for what it is.


JWK

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Sorry, I never heard him mention HR 25 and the tax he propose was 19%, ever thought he has a different plan?

Sounds like the same plan, the 23% percent quoted was stated in terms of how folks are use to state and local sales tax working.

A retailer needing a $100 return on an item would need to collect $123 from the customer and then give 19% of that ($23) to government.

Sounds the same=/=the same

Good grief

 

[Davros]

During the first presidential debate Mike Huckabee once again touted the fairtax proposal, and once again Mike Huckabee has lied about the “fairtax” (see H.R.25 - FairTax Act of 2015. Unfortunately our media personalities will not ask him to support his contentions about the fairtax
.
Huckabee alleges the fairtax would close down the IRS and would replace our current system with a consumption tax. But the truth is, when one takes the time to actually read and study the fairtax legislation, quite the contrary is true.

The fair tax proposes to create two new taxes, a 23 percent tax upon the sale of articles of consumption and another 23 percent tax upon the sale of labor while keeping alive Congress’ power to lay and collect taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries and other lawfully earned incomes.

In fact, Huckabee’s fairtax would create two new tax collecting agencies, an “Excise Tax Bureau” and the “Sales Tax Bureau, in addition to keeping the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms alive which will also be collecting taxes.

It should also be noted that under Huckabee’s “fairtax” ordinary working people who dare to sell the property they have in their own labor are required to register with the federal government and file federal fairtax returns under the penalty of perjury 12 times a freaken year, and they will be compelled to keep any records Congress may dream up, not to mention the threat of audits which will constantly haunt them.

It should also be noted Huckabee’s fairtax proposes to create a new entitlement called the “FAMILY CONSUMPTION ALLOWANCE” under which qualified families will receive a monthly check to pay for a rationed amount of tax free necessities of life, which in turn would make a whole new block of voters with limited economic means extremely dependent upon the federal government for a monthly subsistence check!

If Mike Huckabee were sincere in wanting to force Congress to move to a consumption tax, and end all federal taxes calculated from profits, gains and other lawfully earned “incomes”, and he really wanted to close down the IRS, he would be promoting the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment which begins with the following 32 words:


“SECTION 1. The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money.

Those words would in fact force Congress to return to a consumption based tax system (imposts, duties and excise taxes), and would actually end all federal taxes calculated from lawfully earned profits, gains and other "incomes"!

JWK




“…..with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities“. Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address

You just told a whopper of a lie yourself in this post.

I will wait to see if anyone else spots it.

If you want to make a point, make it. Nobody's playing your games.

 

[boilermaker55]

You can run but you cannot hide! remember that.

Beg to differ.

So you cannot dispute the claim. So all you can do is insult.
Seems you are the true adolescent.

Well, they never intended to let non-whites become citizens either. So perhaps founding fathers' intent is not the best metric.

Go play with yourself. Your adolescent comments are not appreciated.


JWK

Your adolescent comment has nothing to do with the subject of the thread.


JWK

You can "beg" all you want. You are still wrong!

JWK

 

[johnwk]

During the first presidential debate Mike Huckabee once again touted the fairtax proposal, and once again Mike Huckabee has lied about the “fairtax” (see H.R.25 - FairTax Act of 2015. Unfortunately our media personalities will not ask him to support his contentions about the fairtax
.
Huckabee alleges the fairtax would close down the IRS and would replace our current system with a consumption tax. But the truth is, when one takes the time to actually read and study the fairtax legislation, quite the contrary is true.

The fair tax proposes to create two new taxes, a 23 percent tax upon the sale of articles of consumption and another 23 percent tax upon the sale of labor while keeping alive Congress’ power to lay and collect taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries and other lawfully earned incomes.

In fact, Huckabee’s fairtax would create two new tax collecting agencies, an “Excise Tax Bureau” and the “Sales Tax Bureau, in addition to keeping the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms alive which will also be collecting taxes.

It should also be noted that under Huckabee’s “fairtax” ordinary working people who dare to sell the property they have in their own labor are required to register with the federal government and file federal fairtax returns under the penalty of perjury 12 times a freaken year, and they will be compelled to keep any records Congress may dream up, not to mention the threat of audits which will constantly haunt them.

It should also be noted Huckabee’s fairtax proposes to create a new entitlement called the “FAMILY CONSUMPTION ALLOWANCE” under which qualified families will receive a monthly check to pay for a rationed amount of tax free necessities of life, which in turn would make a whole new block of voters with limited economic means extremely dependent upon the federal government for a monthly subsistence check!

If Mike Huckabee were sincere in wanting to force Congress to move to a consumption tax, and end all federal taxes calculated from profits, gains and other lawfully earned “incomes”, and he really wanted to close down the IRS, he would be promoting the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment which begins with the following 32 words:


“SECTION 1. The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money.

Those words would in fact force Congress to return to a consumption based tax system (imposts, duties and excise taxes), and would actually end all federal taxes calculated from lawfully earned profits, gains and other "incomes"!

JWK




“…..with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities“. Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address

You just told a whopper of a lie yourself in this post.

I will wait to see if anyone else spots it.

If you want to make a point, make it. Nobody's playing your games.

I'm still waiting for him to make his point.


JWK

 

[BluesLegend]

Yeah yeah, fair tax, flat tax, blah blah call me when these clowns start talking about reducing the size of government and government spending.

 

[OKTexas]

Sorry, I never heard him mention HR 25 and the tax he propose was 19%, ever thought he has a different plan?

Sounds like the same plan, the 23% percent quoted was stated in terms of how folks are use to state and local sales tax working.

A retailer needing a $100 return on an item would need to collect $123 from the customer and then give 19% of that ($23) to government.

Actually no, the government would get 19 dollars, not 19% of the 23.

 

[johnwk]

Yeah yeah, fair tax, flat tax, blah blah call me when these clowns start talking about reducing the size of government and government spending.

The only reason why our Republican Candidates will never mention the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment is because it would force our Washington Establishment to drastically cut spending and reduce the size of our federal government. In addition, our Republican Candidates have the help of complicit media personalities who likewise will never mention or discuss the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment.


Have you ever heard one of the following ever discuss our Constitution’s original tax plan which the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment is designed to re-establish?

Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, Schnitt, Mark Levin, Dennis Prager, Bill O'rielly, Mike Gallagher, Doc Thompson, Lee Rodgers, Neal Boortz, Mike Huckabee, Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley, Herman Cain, Eric Bolling, Kimberly Guilfoyle, Greg Gutfeld, Dana Perino, Juan Williams, Megyn Kelly, Neil Cavuto, John Stossel etc., etc.,?


JWK

 

[my2¢]

Sorry, I never heard him mention HR 25 and the tax he propose was 19%, ever thought he has a different plan?

Sounds like the same plan, the 23% percent quoted was stated in terms of how folks are use to state and local sales tax working.

A retailer needing a $100 return on an item would need to collect $123 from the customer and then give 19% of that ($23) to government.

Actually no, the government would get 19 dollars, not 19%.

Actually the H.R.25 - FairTax Act of 2015 calls fort a 23% of the retailer's gross. Thus for a return of $100 he'll need to collect $129.87 from the buyer.

SEC. 101. Imposition of sales tax.
(a) In General.—There is hereby imposed a tax on the use or consumption in the United States of taxable property or services.
(b) Rate.—
(1) FOR 2017.—In the calendar year 2017, the rate of tax is 23 percent of the gross payments for the taxable property or service.

 

[BluesLegend]

Yeah yeah, fair tax, flat tax, blah blah call me when these clowns start talking about reducing the size of government and government spending.

The only reason why our Republican Candidates will never mention the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment is because it would force our Washington Establishment to drastically cut spending and reduce the size of our federal government. In addition, our Republican Candidates have the help of complicit media personalities who likewise will never mention or discuss the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment.


Have you ever heard one of the following ever discuss our Constitution’s original tax plan which the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment is designed to re-establish?

Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, Schnitt, Mark Levin, Dennis Prager, Bill O'rielly, Mike Gallagher, Doc Thompson, Lee Rodgers, Neal Boortz, Mike Huckabee, Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley, Herman Cain, Eric Bolling, Kimberly Guilfoyle, Greg Gutfeld, Dana Perino, Juan Williams, Megyn Kelly, Neil Cavuto, John Stossel etc., etc.,?


JWK

I have to admit I have never heard of this.

 

[OKTexas]

Sorry, I never heard him mention HR 25 and the tax he propose was 19%, ever thought he has a different plan?

Sounds like the same plan, the 23% percent quoted was stated in terms of how folks are use to state and local sales tax working.

A retailer needing a $100 return on an item would need to collect $123 from the customer and then give 19% of that ($23) to government.

Actually no, the government would get 19 dollars, not 19%.

Actually the H.R.25 - FairTax Act of 2015 calls fort a 23% of the retailer's gross. Thus for a return of $100 he'll need to collect $129.87 from the buyer.

SEC. 101. Imposition of sales tax.
(a) In General.—There is hereby imposed a tax on the use or consumption in the United States of taxable property or services.
(b) Rate.—
(1) FOR 2017.—In the calendar year 2017, the rate of tax is 23 percent of the gross payments for the taxable property or service.

Where did the other 6.87% come from?

 

[my2¢]

It isn't figured like state and local sales tax which is based on the cost of the item but rather is based on the total amount the retailer or service provider receives. Thus $129.87 is the tax base, not $100.

But my main objection with tax is that out-of-pocket medical service is taxed. Likewise childcare and elder care.

 

[g5000]

During the first presidential debate Mike Huckabee once again touted the fairtax proposal, and once again Mike Huckabee has lied about the “fairtax” (see H.R.25 - FairTax Act of 2015. Unfortunately our media personalities will not ask him to support his contentions about the fairtax
.
Huckabee alleges the fairtax would close down the IRS and would replace our current system with a consumption tax. But the truth is, when one takes the time to actually read and study the fairtax legislation, quite the contrary is true.

The fair tax proposes to create two new taxes, a 23 percent tax upon the sale of articles of consumption and another 23 percent tax upon the sale of labor while keeping alive Congress’ power to lay and collect taxes calculated from profits, gains, salaries and other lawfully earned incomes.

In fact, Huckabee’s fairtax would create two new tax collecting agencies, an “Excise Tax Bureau” and the “Sales Tax Bureau, in addition to keeping the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms alive which will also be collecting taxes.

It should also be noted that under Huckabee’s “fairtax” ordinary working people who dare to sell the property they have in their own labor are required to register with the federal government and file federal fairtax returns under the penalty of perjury 12 times a freaken year, and they will be compelled to keep any records Congress may dream up, not to mention the threat of audits which will constantly haunt them.

It should also be noted Huckabee’s fairtax proposes to create a new entitlement called the “FAMILY CONSUMPTION ALLOWANCE” under which qualified families will receive a monthly check to pay for a rationed amount of tax free necessities of life, which in turn would make a whole new block of voters with limited economic means extremely dependent upon the federal government for a monthly subsistence check!

If Mike Huckabee were sincere in wanting to force Congress to move to a consumption tax, and end all federal taxes calculated from profits, gains and other lawfully earned “incomes”, and he really wanted to close down the IRS, he would be promoting the Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment which begins with the following 32 words:


“SECTION 1. The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money.

Those words would in fact force Congress to return to a consumption based tax system (imposts, duties and excise taxes), and would actually end all federal taxes calculated from lawfully earned profits, gains and other "incomes"!

JWK




“…..with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens—a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities“. Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address

You just told a whopper of a lie yourself in this post.

I will wait to see if anyone else spots it.

If you want to make a point, make it. Nobody's playing your games.

I'm still waiting for him to make his point.


JWK

The whopper lie you told was about the family consumption allowance. The prebate is not just for people "with limited economic means". That's a lie.

You didn't even bother reading the bill to which you linked, and clearly don't know anything about how the Fair Tax works. The prebate is for everyone.

Even billionaires would receive the family consumption allowance.


As for the 16th Amendment, if you read your own link, you will find it abolishes income taxes, payroll taxes, estate taxes, and gift taxes, and at the very end it says:

ELIMINATION OF SALES TAX IF SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT NOT REPEALED.
If the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is not repealed before the end of the 7-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, then all provisions of, and amendments made by, this Act shall not apply to any use or consumption in any year beginning after December 31 of the calendar year in which or with which such period ends, except that the Sales Tax Bureau of the Department of the Treasury shall not be terminated until 6 months after such December 31.

 

[g5000]

The Fair Tax is a tax on consumption, something which every economist will tell you is better than a tax on production (e.g., income tax).

 

[g5000]

Other advantages of a Fair Tax are that you can't hide a tax increase, and everyone will feel it instantly. It would be the end of "gimme gimme gimme and make that guy over there pay for it". And that will make it harder to demand more government spending.



"So you want to give free puppies to hookers? Okay! We'll just raise the Fair Tax another basis point."

 

[ogibillm]

Sorry, I never heard him mention HR 25 and the tax he propose was 19%, ever thought he has a different plan?

Sounds like the same plan, the 23% percent quoted was stated in terms of how folks are use to state and local sales tax working.

A retailer needing a $100 return on an item would need to collect $123 from the customer and then give 19% of that ($23) to government.

Actually no, the government would get 19 dollars, not 19%.

Actually the H.R.25 - FairTax Act of 2015 calls fort a 23% of the retailer's gross. Thus for a return of $100 he'll need to collect $129.87 from the buyer.

SEC. 101. Imposition of sales tax.
(a) In General.—There is hereby imposed a tax on the use or consumption in the United States of taxable property or services.
(b) Rate.—
(1) FOR 2017.—In the calendar year 2017, the rate of tax is 23 percent of the gross payments for the taxable property or service.

Where did the other 6.87% come from?

math.

 

[OKTexas]

Sorry, I never heard him mention HR 25 and the tax he propose was 19%, ever thought he has a different plan?

Sounds like the same plan, the 23% percent quoted was stated in terms of how folks are use to state and local sales tax working.

A retailer needing a $100 return on an item would need to collect $123 from the customer and then give 19% of that ($23) to government.

Actually no, the government would get 19 dollars, not 19%.

Actually the H.R.25 - FairTax Act of 2015 calls fort a 23% of the retailer's gross. Thus for a return of $100 he'll need to collect $129.87 from the buyer.

SEC. 101. Imposition of sales tax.
(a) In General.—There is hereby imposed a tax on the use or consumption in the United States of taxable property or services.
(b) Rate.—
(1) FOR 2017.—In the calendar year 2017, the rate of tax is 23 percent of the gross payments for the taxable property or service.

Where did the other 6.87% come from?

math.

Must be that fuzzy math we keep hearing about, because 23% of $100.00 is $23.00 not $29.87.

 

[g5000]

It isn't figured like state and local sales tax which is based on the cost of the item but rather is based on the total amount the retailer or service provider receives. Thus $129.87 is the tax base, not $100.

But my main objection with tax is that out-of-pocket medical service is taxed. Likewise childcare and elder care.

Once you open the door to exemptions, the system is corrupted.