12

The FairTax Book: Saying Goodbye to the Income Tax and the IRS

Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years, 9 months ago to Books
238 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

The FairTax Book: Saying Goodbye to the Income Tax and the IRS

Authors, Neal Boortz & Congressman John Linder
196 pages. ISBN 978-0-06-087549-7

This short book detailing the FairTax was a #1 New York Times Bestseller.

I looked through my library in search of and intending to write a review of a book that offered some solutions to our present problems. I believe this book fits the bill. If we wish to reform our government and reclaim our liberty there can be no more effective way than to remove the easily abused funding method. I have heard many suggestions and objections regarding this option. This book explores and answers them all.

The many seemingly insurmountable financial problems facing us make this option very attractive. From addressing the “Social Security tax, the Medicare tax, corporate income taxes, the death tax, the self-employment tax, the alternative minimum tax, the gift tax, capital gains taxes, tax audits, and some major headaches every April 15” this is the most fair, possible and workable solution. It is not the be all, end all, to all of our problems but it is likely the most effective first step we could take.

What would be the best way to fund our federal government? My preference has little probability of occurring, but this option has some chance of passing and is thus, I believe, the best option considering our present political climate. The proposal is fair; it treats all taxpayers equally and the benefits are manifold. The poor would not pay any more than they do now. The middle class and even the rich would benefit. The only losers are the grafters, special interests and lobbyists who care not that their efforts push the burdens of their successes on the backs of others.

Mr. Boortz and Congressman Linder have written a very important short read for anyone interested in learning about and promoting something that could really help. Mr. Boortz has retired from the radio and Congressman Linder retired from congress in 2011, but their book continues in the effort to promote the proposal.

Do you want to turbo charge our economy? Take back your liberty? Constrain the tyrants? Please read this book and investigate www.FairTax.org for detailed information about the proposal and how you can help. If you find it acceptable, then please urge your representatives in government to support the effort.

Respectfully,
O.A.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 6.
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Let me know what you think.
    The first chapter is a real gripper and it continues to head slap you throughout!

    I met the author about a year ago in a conference in Orlando. He said he's had a lot of questions raised by official types regarding the accuracy of some of his fictional descriptions (questions as in, "This is TOO accurate" or "How did you know about the senator's security arrangements?")

    Vanderboegh is also the father of the "Three Percenters". He constantly warns federales that they're overreaching, and that they risk a second American Revolution. He cites the fact that during the first American Revolution, only 3% of Americans actually took the field against the British. Using 80 to 100 million as the number of current-day gun owners, and using the same 3%, Mike has posited that an army of over 2.4 million armed citizens would overwhelm the combined forces of all military and police in America.

    The Southern Poverty Law Center says of Vanderboegh: "Mike Vanderboegh, a longtime leader and propagandist in the antigovernment “Patriot” movement, specializes in fiery rhetoric urging violent “self-defense” against a tyrannical, Constitution-flouting U.S. government determined to impose the Communist principles of gun control and universal health care." - so you KNOW he's one of the good guys!

    He's more recently suggested that the government is pushing the People hard enough that there may be a backlash in which Harry Reid might get "his balls ripped off". ;-)

    >> Mike Vanderboegh, the militia group leader who warned in a speech at the Bundy Ranch last month that the United States is on the verge of “civil war on a vast scale” that will involve Sen. Harry Reid having his “balls ripped off,” joined Alan Colmes on Wednesday to defend his now-infamous comments.

    “It’s funny, I’ve been warning about the possibility of civil war caused by government bad conduct for the past 20 years, but it wasn’t until I started mentioning the collectivist senators who were putting their own testicles at risk that people started paying attention,” Vanderboegh told Colmes. “I think I must have accidentally put my finger on where you fellows worship.”

    He added that the “balls ripped off” expression was just a rhetorical flourish, and that he could just as easily have said “put a bullet in your head”: “I’m saying that if you push ordinary people enough, they will react. And whether they rip your testicles off or put a bullet in your head is sort of immaterial, assuming that you initiate the violence.”
    http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/mi...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    >> More children, bigger check.
    How is that fair? You pop out rug rats and someone else gets to subsidize them?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by BambiB 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes. I read it years ago. Ross said he was coerced by the publisher into putting the love scenes in. That explains how he nearly ruined an otherwise very entertaining book. After I read my copy, I sent it on to a friend with instructions to read and pass on to one of HIS friends.

    Ross has a web site somewhere with commentary under the heading of "Ross in Range" (IIRC). Stories are almost as entertaining as UC.

    If you haven't read "Absolved", you'll want to catch it. *You can find it on line.) The writing is better - and it has truly shaken some of the political types. (Guess that happens when you use the actual floor plan of a Federal fusion center in your description of a fictional attack that wipes out everyone in the center!) BTW, the author was instrumental in breaking the "Fast & Furious" story. He was on it for a full month before anyone in the lamestream press would even give it a second look. (Sort of like Drudge and the little blue dress - except from the press' perspective Oblowme can do no wrong.)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Moreover, they will finance the war on both sides. Having just visited Jekyll Island, I now know the full story behind how the Fed works.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by plusaf 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Ah, folks, my suggestion/proposal/idea was an engineering approach to implementing a fairly simple/easy way of monitoring and collecting tax revenues under the system I tried to describe.

    Your fears are well-founded and justified by decades, if not millennia of people's experience with governments run amok.

    I'd just like to point out that THAT part of the problem, although it may never be solved, is its own, separate issue. IF a 'floor level pay-no-income-tax' process were implemented, my suggestion would just be one possible way to manage it.

    The overarching problem that you're describing still would need to be addressed, but an IRS that just did 'store and forward' and siphoning off the tax dollars only after the threshold is met WOULD work with the right controls, transparency (and opacity) which our current flock of government "leaders" would never allow to be put in place.

    The engineering solution could work, but, as you aptly put it, the political/social roadblocks and corruption would certainly make success impossible.

    When you figure out how to untie that Gordian Knot, please let us all know. I see that part of the 'solution' as impossible so long as the general electorate keeps returning the current batch of morons and crooks to office.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Ever read "Unintended Consequences"?
    Entertainiing, educational, and recommended.
    Warning: Adult theme with some graphic violence.
    (Apologies if I have asked this same question before ;^)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And they will finance the war by printing money out of thin air through the Federal Reserve - effectively devaluing the money that I have saved and invested.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If we have no tax, then the Federal Reserve will just start printing more money than they already do.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    As a Conservative I like this approach because it restores power to the republic and diminishes the leverage of the Fedgov on the States. In this way the Fed Gov gets what left and States can minimize the tax burden on their own people.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Good morning Robbie53024,
    The government should never have gained the power to bean count the lot of us. They have abused this power to foment class warfare, and abused us with a considerable list of other punitive ways to fund their own cronyism. It was entirely foreseeable.
    O.A.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hello winterwind,
    Though not a perfect system, I believe having the tax presented and itemized on every receipt will make them uncomfortable and aware of their tax burden. People go out of their way to shop for the best price on goods and services. I suspect they will do the same with their tax liabilities. The inherent transparency will serve to inhibit increases and may provide pressure for decreases. People paying in this fashion will be as acutely aware as I and everyone else who pays quarterly rather than having employer deductions is. In this fashion I see it as step towards a system more resembling that of our founding. At least you would have control of your money, purchases and tax contributions. I want everyone as uncomfortable and aware as I am, but I do not want the government leaning on me for payment or keeping records of every citizen. I have seen too many businesses and associates personally bankrupted because of penalties and interest on top of the burdensome taxes. Some didn't even legitimately owe what the IRS said they did, but you can't fight them. They have more time and money. They can break you with attorney fees alone.

    Regards,
    O.A.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    No, just one more incentive to keep pay off the books. Unless you're also advocating complete gov't take over of all financial records for companies?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hello AJASinoff!
    Excellent. This would be in keeping with apportionment as was originally intended.
    I like it!
    Regards,
    O.A.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnmford 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I'm only 64 but I fear I will be dead a buried before any significant changes will be made. I agree with you that it will take an uprising to get rid of the entrenched political class and bring our government back to where it should be. "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely"
    Thanks for a great discussion.

    johnf
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by plusaf 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Excellent points, John. Note that in my scenario, the IRS would have negligible "control" but act as a "store and forward monitor" of whether an individual had reached the 'legal threshold.' And that's all.

    Unfortunately, in reality, most of these suggestions don't have the chances of the proverbial ice cube in hell because of the politicians and 'political realities' today.

    Just like ISIS and Hamas, nothing will change until there's a popular uprising of the 'people' when they finally get fed up with the 'current state of affairs' and demand REAL change...

    I don't expect that to happen in my lifetime, so I've gone to my own Gulch as much as possible, but hey, I only turn 69 this fall, so maybe there's a chance...
    Cheers!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnmford 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Storo, I just rechecked the second book entitled "Fairtax: The Truth" The prebate applies to all household. The poverty line you refer to determines the amount each household receives. Not the level of their income.
    It's a good book to check out.
    Thanks

    johnf
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Storo 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If memory serves, the Prebate as defined in the book will apply only for those persons or families "up to the poverty line". In other words, if your income, not counting government handouts, is at or below the arbitrarily set poverty line, you get the Prebate. Can you spell "earned income tax credit" boys and girls?
    This the same third who pay no taxes today will continue to pay little or none under the Fair Tax Prebate scheme.
    There was a study done some years ago that showed that if every citizen and corporation paid just 10% in a flat income tax, 1) there would be more than enough money to fund the government, 2) you could truly eliminate the IRS since your tax would be taken directly from your paycheck every pay period based on what you earned that period, 3) the US would become more attractive for business since we would have a very low corporate tax rate, 4) we could eliminate the "progressive" (oppressive?) tax system that exists today, and 5) eliminate most if not all of the politics that is in constant play regarding how we pay for things.
    Coupled with the Flat Tax would have to be a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution which would require the Federal Government to live within it's means, except during a time of war declared by a 3/4 supporting vote of the House of Representatives.
    Programs to help the poor can still be put in place, but they would need to be funded and comply with the Balanced Budget. If you qualified for such a program, the benefits would NOT count as regular income for tax purposes. A Flat Tax would also eliminate the "unfunded mandates" that Congress is so fond of, by making Congress provide funding for any program within the constraints of a balanced budget, and force Congress to prioritize spending programs.
    The 10% flat income tax could be included as part of the Balanced Budget Amendment, thus requiring another Constitutional Amendment to change it.
    EVERYONE, including those at low income levels, benefits from the services provided by the Federal Government such as roads, schools, national defense, etc. ALL citizens should participate in funding these services.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnmford 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The prebate is the most misunderstood part of the fairtax plan, which is why a second book was written to clarify things. The prebate does not eliminate all the tax for a low income family, only the tax they will pay on essentials (ie. food, clothing etc). And everyone's prebate is based on family size, not income. So a family of four gets the same prebate no matter how much money they earn.
    Since the tax is part of the price for goods, everyone pays taxes.
    For example: A low income family, middle income family, and wealthy family each go out and buy a new tv. Each of the tv's cost $500. Out of that $500, $105 is sent off as tax. So each family has paid their tax. No one is getting away with not paying. Thanks

    johnf
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo