Fair Tax Leadership

Comment

Comment by Tom Freeman on June 7, 2010 at 5:07pm

This is from Tom Freeman, DD-NJ8. FairTax NJ is running a campaign to get Neal Boortz on WABC-770AM Radio. This would be a tremoundous boost for the FairTax in the NYC tri-state area.

Step two of the plan to get Neal on WABC radio is for everyone to send an e mail to the Program Director, Laurie Cantillo at
laurie.cantillo@citcomm.com. Feel free to exclude your town and State if you are not in the WABC listening area. Help us get thousands of FairTaxers to tell WABC that "We Want Neal!"

Comment by Adrian B Early on May 31, 2010 at 7:34pm

Steve Bang asked others and me:

I’d like to approach the public employee union leadership and convince them that the FairTax is in their best interests and ask them to endorse the FairTax and it’s candidates.

I know it’s a challenge and is probably antithetical to the way they think but I believe a compelling case can be made.

Steve is right.

I replied in part:

The goal is to get union leadership to "have" (their own) bright idea that the Fair Tax would help the pay, benefits, and security of their union dues payers. So, they advocate the Fair Tax to the "rank and file".

But this is VERY REASONABLE !!! The Fair Tax ONLY deals with funding approach for government. It DOES NOT reduce the level of that funding. In fact, the unburdening of business and labor to PRODUCE rather than either consume or do "leisure" to avoid taxes means that (As JOHN F KENNEDY (not Reagan when talking to labor leaders) found out) lower tax rates lead to MORE TAX REVENUE. And not only that, the Fair Tax adds tax revenue from IMPORTS not exports, and not just domestic production suppliers to American consumers.

The key points are:

1) The Fair Tax is about where tax revenue comes from, not its amount.

2) Fair Tax brings American prosperity by:
A) Not taxing labor or capital inputs to American production.
B) By taxing foreign imports to American consumers

3) Fair Tax broadens the tax base to include imports to fund government jobs for unionized public employees (the concern of this target group).

No reduction of government revenue, expands US economy, and broadens the "burden" for tax base to include foreign and illegal "suppliers" to American consumers. The Fair Tax is better for public sector union leaders and their rank and file.

-ABE

Comment by Marv Kuhn on May 20, 2010 at 8:13pm

This is how I'm encouraging candidates to say the word, "FairTax".

Dear Mr. Woodall, (running for Cong. John Linder's seat)

I have been holding your campaign contribution envelope for several weeks now pondering whether to change my mind about political contributions.

You may have noticed I once gave generously to Congressman Linder.

However, I noticed that, in every campaign memo he sent out to the public, the word “FairTax” was never promoted or explained.

It appeared to be a “profanity” that couldn’t be said. The letters and fliers he sent implied he was for immigration reform, sound businesses, and stimulus ideas but he never used the word, “FairTax”, nor enumerated how the FairTax could remedy all of these problems.

I had a similar experience with another candidate running for office in Texas and made an initial generous contribution because that candidate would state the word, “FairTax”, at fundraisers when he noticed I was attending.

But in all campaign correspondences and in bulk campaign mail-outs, “FairTax” was never mentioned—just general political rhetoric such as “economy, jobs, immigration, etc.” I once asked why FairTax was not on every memo, mailer and political correspondence. The answer was that it was controversial and was a challenging subject.

I explained how it solved all of the issues discussed. The bill was already written..…no research was needed for a new bill, no negotiations nor arm-twisting was needed to produce a bill, no funding was needed for research and 75 economists from major universities, and 65-70 co-sponsors are already on board.

Since this candidate refused to support, promote, and speak of the FairTax in circulars, letters, or fliers, I ceased contributions.

It was disappointing seeing your campaign letter had not mentioned the FairTax.

Therefore, I expect no promotion as you have already demonstrated and regretfully have decided not to contribute to your campaign.

Regards,

Marv Kuhn

Comment by Adrian B Early on May 20, 2010 at 8:36am

Hedge Funds can now "invest" in corporate tax cheat whistleblowing.

See http://finance.yahoo.com/news/WhistleBlowers-Become-nytimes-2882004... .

They say in part:

Informants who turn in tax cheats have to wait years to get their share of any reward from the I.R.S.’s recently expanded whistle-blower program. So hedge funds, private equity groups and other big investors are offering an alternative. They are essentially agreeing to buy a percentage of those future payouts in exchange for a smaller amount upfront to the whistle-blowers.

The surging size of the potential awards is driving all the interest. Three years ago, the I.R.S. began offering bigger rewards — 15 percent to 30 percent of whatever money the government recovered — in a move that has turbocharged the agency’s whistle-blower program.

Where it once handled only a trickle of tips, often involving relatively small amounts of unpaid taxes, I.R.S. offices now receive a torrent of big money claims. Accountants and company employees have taken to trooping in bearing computer records and boxes of documents to back up their claims of underpayment by big companies.

____

Would the Fair Tax not be better than this?

-ABE

Comment by Adrian B Early on April 30, 2010 at 11:17am

We tax cigarettes, claiming we want less lung cancer.

If we do not tax consumption, we seem to seek less saving.
If we tax labor, we want (or will get) less production output from labor.
If we tax businesses, we seek fewer goods produced here and jobs.

When we tax consumption, we ACTUALLY fund government as the prime reason for the taxes. The "toll" is for access to the American consumer (for US or foreign suppliers of goods and services). That is the Fair Tax, a prime path to liberty and US economic resurgence.

-ABE

Comment by Adrian B Early on April 30, 2010 at 10:20am

The VAT is being pushed by big tax and spenders to seek following Europe's "lead" (think of Greece) with ANOTHER tax.

Ken Hoagland claims this opaque, for the government, not of, for, and by the people consumption tax would "kill" the Fair Tax. Be that as it may, note this:

The VAT is on American production. Perhaps the greatest value of the Fair Tax is its enhancement of US global competitiveness. The Fair (sales) Tax, taxes foreign goods sold here, not just US output. And it DOES NOT tax US production shipped abroad.

The VAT (by itself) is not quite as stupid as the income tax (and business taxes), but close to it. In this age of global competition, we should prefer intelligent tax policy and reject "what's in it for me, Mr. Politician (or lobbyist)" Washington DC thinking. They work for us.

-ABE

Comment by Nancy L. Gatchel on April 23, 2010 at 8:03pm

Good work, Adrian. Glad your hard at it. You're currect: Fair Tax is simmering just below the surface. Soon, it'll blow the lid off. The interest is palpable.

Comment by Adrian B Early on April 8, 2010 at 9:10pm

Donald Trump advocated on Cavuto (see also http://twitter.com/ReidAlbecker/status/10386824855) taxing the Chinese (goods sold here). The FAIR TAX DOES THIS ! (without government bureaucrat micromanagement)

I say if the Chinese (or their central bank through Yuan underpricing) want to subsidize goods sold to American consumers that is Ok with me. But they (as all "vendors" to US consumers) must pay the Fair Tax for that access. This is like the "dumping" charges against Japan in the 1980s when we feared they would "conquer" America economically. The Chinese with central government control will be little more successful in this than were the Soviets (if we stay free-market with a sensible taxation policy, that is).

What sayest thou?

-ABE

Comment by Adrian B Early on April 7, 2010 at 6:11pm

Stephen Hayes on Special Report (substitute hosted by Chris Wallace today) said he likes a consumption tax AS REPLACEMENT for income taxes, not as an add-on VAT, the subject then under discussion.

The equivalent of the Fair Tax message is simmering below the surface much further than many of us realize. Work will bring it into the spotlight.

-ABE

Comment by Adrian B Early on April 7, 2010 at 9:09am

Dear Fair Tax folks,

I sent this on email below due to the Glenn Beck "questions from audience" show where he explained why he prefers the Flat Tax over the Fair Tax. See http://www.fairtaxnation.com/group/fairtaxleadership entry of 4:35 PM on 2 April 2010.

__________

Dear Glenn,

You thought the Fair Tax allows multiple sales tax rates. It does not.
The Fair Tax is simpler than Flat Tax; ends IRS and income taxation
that was unconstitutional before 16th amendment purportedly passed.

__________

I will seek to reach Andrew Napolitano also, since there is more "email volume" to Mr. Beck.

Suggestions are welcome.

-ABE

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• …
• 39
• Next ›
• Page