Rep vs. Dem Differences

"Wdtabor" wrote in message
...
More than merely amazing. The Americans for Tax Reform traced the taxes
imbedded in the cost of various goods. One was a Ford Taurus automobile,
priced
at $23,000. They found the car could have been sold, at the same profit,
for
$12,700 with the imbedded taxes removed. The buyer of that car, who might
be
under the illusion all taxation has been successfully pushed off on "the
rich"
pays and astounding $10,700 plus interest when he purchases that car.

Surprise!

No surprise.

But just how to you plan on getting the government to release itself from
the public teet? Our two significant parties don't seem differentiable from
one another when it comes to spending money, they only argue about where.

You can shift around who pays the biggest tax burden, you can shift around
programs, but the only way to fix things is to reduce how much is spent and
this is an enormously difficult problem to tackle.

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
et...

"Wdtabor" wrote in message
...
More than merely amazing. The Americans for Tax Reform traced the taxes
imbedded in the cost of various goods. One was a Ford Taurus automobile,
priced
at $23,000. They found the car could have been sold, at the same profit,
for
$12,700 with the imbedded taxes removed. The buyer of that car, who might
be
under the illusion all taxation has been successfully pushed off on "the
rich"
pays and astounding $10,700 plus interest when he purchases that car.

Surprise!

No surprise.

But just how to you plan on getting the government to release itself from
the public teet? Our two significant parties don't seem differentiable
from one another when it comes to spending money, they only argue about
where.

You can shift around who pays the biggest tax burden, you can shift around
programs, but the only way to fix things is to reduce how much is spent
and this is an enormously difficult problem to tackle.

It will cost a lot of jobs and that means votes . Whether it is government
employees, or employees working for government contractors. why make
problems for yourself.

Bush is just going to borrow the money and Kerry is going to raise taxes. I
know which is sounder and going into debt at the current rate is not a good
idea. Sooner or later the tax payers are going to have to pay the bill.

Its a bit rich asking our kids to pay extra taxes in the future to fund our
tax cuts now so as we can have a ball. They wont thank us for it and nor
should they.

In article , "Peter Gottlieb"
writes:

But just how to you plan on getting the government to release itself from
the public teet? Our two significant parties don't seem differentiable from
one another when it comes to spending money, they only argue about where.

You can shift around who pays the biggest tax burden, you can shift around
programs, but the only way to fix things is to reduce how much is spent and
this is an enormously difficult problem to tackle.


That is, of course, the point. We spend so much only because the majority of
the electorate PERCEIVES federal spending as "free" to them. The vast majority
of the tax burden is concealed in imbedded taxes in the cost of goods and
services. Add to that the "employer contribution" to FICA and FUTA, and the
painless nature of witholding taxes from gross pay and the result is that
people vote for spendthrift politicians because they buy into the illusion that
someone else is paying for it.

What the FairTax does, more than anything else, is to dispel that illusion and
make the cost of government visible othose who are paying for it. When the
hardworking low and middle income taxpayers, who currently think they get all
their tax back when they file their return, see the true cost of government on
every grocery receipt, they will be less inclined to vote for politicians who
fund $50 million domed ranforests in Iowa.

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

.... The Americans for Tax Reform traced the taxes
imbedded in the cost of various goods. One was a Ford Taurus automobile, priced
at $23,000. They found the car could have been sold, at the same profit, for
$12,700 with the imbedded taxes removed. The buyer of that car, who might be
under the illusion all taxation has been successfully pushed off on "the rich"
pays and astounding $10,700 plus interest when he purchases that car.

Surprise!

I understand that when ALL taxes are considered, we in the USA have a
*regressive* tax system.

vince norris

In article , vincent p. norris
writes:


I understand that when ALL taxes are considered, we in the USA have a
*regressive* tax system.


For details on just how regressive it is, go to Fairtax.org and click the
Research tab and then take the link to "Current System"

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

But it does not necessarily raise the price of bread by the full amount of
the tax. The increased price will reduce demand and to optimize profit the
bakers will absorb some of the increase.

The general observation that consumers pay all the taxes paid by their
suppliers is of course completely correct.

Strictly speaking, an increase in price will NOT reduce "demand," it
will decrease the *quantity* of bread purchased. Economics textbooks
define demand as a "schedule of the various quantities people buy at
various prices...."

The demand for some products is quite "inelastic," which means the
quantity does not vary much as the price changes. I would imagine
the demand for bread is fairly inelastic, so that the quantity would
not change very much if the price rise were small or moderate.

And aren't your two sentences contradictory? If bakers absorb some of
the tax, then consumers do not pay "all" the taxes paid by suppliers.

vince norris

"vincent p. norris" wrote in message
...
And aren't your two sentences contradictory? If bakers absorb some of
the tax, then consumers do not pay "all" the taxes paid by suppliers.

Not contradictory at all, just different domains.

100% of the income for a baker derrives from the sale of goods (renting the
apartment upstairs would be a separate business, for example). Therefore,
the consumers pay every single penny of tax that the baker owes. Now, if
the baker's taxes increase significantly, market conditions may prevent the
baker from increasing product prices enough to fully cover those taxes. So,
part of what was the baker's profit now goes to the government. The
consumers still pay all the taxes the baker has, but the baker now gets less
pay.

Wdtabor wrote:

A tax placed on bakers with names starting with the letters A to M could not be
passed on to the customers because of competition from bakers with
alphabetically later names, but a tax placed on ALL bakers simply raises the
cost of bread, since there are no alternate sources for the product unaffected
by that cost.

So does the tax on bakers with names starting with the letters A to M. Many of them
will go out of business, reducing competion and allowing the remaining bakers to
raise prices.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

G.R. Patterson III wrote:


Wdtabor wrote:

A tax placed on bakers with names starting with the letters A to M could not be
passed on to the customers because of competition from bakers with
alphabetically later names, but a tax placed on ALL bakers simply raises the
cost of bread, since there are no alternate sources for the product unaffected
by that cost.


So does the tax on bakers with names starting with the letters A to M. Many of them
will go out of business, reducing competion and allowing the remaining bakers to
raise prices.

Baloney, they'll just change their names so they start with a "good" letter.

"Newps" wrote in message
...

So does the tax on bakers with names starting with the letters A to M.
Many of them
will go out of business, reducing competion and allowing the remaining
bakers to
raise prices.

Baloney, they'll just change their names so they start with a "good"
letter.


Reminds me of when there was the even/odd gas during the Arab oil embargo.
My family had two cars and a small transfer pump from JC Whitney. Business
went on.