I just finished reading the The Fair Tax, and found it interesting. I apologize if I am bringing up a past discussion that I missed-I know this book is a couple of years old. I am not an expert on economics, but it seems like it is based on sound reasoning. Anyone have any thoughts on, or criticisms of, this book's ideas?
BTW: Neal Boortz, co-author of this book, is the radio host who told his audience to read Atlas Shrugged, I did so on his suggestion, and this is how I became interested in Objectivism.
|A former member|
I haven't read the book, but from what I've read on the subject, of course the first objection is that it only replaces the current tax system rather than abolishing it, but it's not its purpose to abolish it anyway, so within the context of its purpose - while in a lot of ways it at least seems better than the current system, the welfare prebate seems to be a bad idea. Sure, it would be a political necessity for it to pass, but I read somewhere that the best tax reform idea would be to remove all exemptions/deductions for having low income or assets, rather charge everyone from the very first dollar, thus removing some of the incentive to be poor. This could be easily applied to the fair tax by just eliminating the prebate, and then the overall tax rate could be reduced, probably significantly. That would be the main change needed.
Other than that, of course lots of industries are or will be lobbying to have their products or services excluded, but it might be reasonable to exclude such big ticket items as homes and cars, which are pretty much necessities. This idea and others need to be refined further.
Aside from the fair tax idea itself, after reading (I don't remember where) the idea of eliminating special breaks for the poor, possibly the best other tax structure would be not even a flat rate tax but a flat $ amount tax, and in fact I think that this would be closer to what the founders intended, that IF there ever was an overall tax on each individual, it should be the same amount of money per adult person, almost like a membership fee or annual dues or something. It would be interesting to see what that would work out to and how well it would get rid of the incentives to be poor - but I'm not sure how it would be enforced or even administered without having almost the same kind of IRS Gestapo we have now. Besides, it's probably a financial impossibility for many people at this point, so it would have to be reached gradually somehow, and in that situation there's always potential for failure or outright sabotage.
A more ideal system (although it probably needs more work) would probably be similar to that provided by TC2K (none) or http://texas.freecoun... (skip to the Amendments at the bottom and look at Amendment 15).
Gned the Gnome
Edited by User 4,311,598 on Dec 22, 2007 2:14 AM