Reddit mentions of FairTax: The Truth: Answering the Critics

This article is completely wrong. This article is from 2004 and every single one of these problems was addressed in the book The Fair Tax. If you don't want to buy the book just goolge Neal Boortz and Fair Tax. There are plenty of free sources of information on the fair tax out there.

If you do not like the current system there are plenty of alternatives out there being pushed. Start looking into alternative tax systems.

I support the Fairtax because it moves the power directly to the citizens of the United States. Of course that is not the only benefit.

Do your homework. I suggest reading the book and perhaps the follow up book.

Just remember the people who wrote the book are obviously for this system so keep that in mind. It is hard to read anything without it having a bias towards one thing or another. Use your own discretion for information you find that is pro-fairtax and anti-fairtax.

>But those are not solely the domain of a "Fair" Tax. Those things could be done in any system, so they're not an inherent advantage of the "Fair" Tax.

This is arguing for the sake of arguing. No other system proposes this. The FairTax is an actual bill introduced in congress. Part of it repeals these other taxes. The foundation of the bill is based on repealing these other taxes.

>Most drug dealers are not living the high life and getting rich. They're barely scraping by. Their rebate check from the government would probably outpace what they're paying in "Fair" Tax.

Cite your source and I'll address this.

>All of Europe also supplements their VAT with an income tax. By eliminating our income tax, we'd have to raise the VAT well above what Europe charges. The two situations are not identical and you know that.

You asserted that taxing tourists kills tourism. I proved you wrong with an example. Also, the FairTax isn't a VAT.

>And my point is that those lobbying activities are just as harmful to the integrity of our political system and they aren't addressed here. Arguing that a "Fair" Tax reduces lobbying is completely worthless as long as our politicians are still bought and paid for by a hundred other lobbying organizations that still have an interest in bribing officials. You're just shrugging and saying, "Well at least they're only getting bribed for favorable regulations now, instead of tax breaks." So what?

So we shouldn't reduce the means to bribe politicians in one way because we can't do it in every way?

>Which would still mean that the SSA would need to be larger than it is now, negating at least part of the savings you get from shutting down the IRS.

The IRS is HUGE and has way more responsibilities than just automating a bank draft. Again, you're just asserting that one would wipe out the other. Until you cite a source, I have no need to address your assertion.


It has become clear that you're engaging in partisan arguing. You're defending an imperfect system and attacking a new idea (very progressive of you). It isn't a Republican vs Democrat thing. I'd encourage you to read up on the FairTax to get a better idea of it. One of the books below is specifically written to address criticisms. From the opening it admits that it is not a perfect tax, but far superior to our current system. I'm not going to argue anymore because it's become clear that you're not even considering it, you're only acting to reinforce your existing opinions. It's healthy to question a new idea, but that's not what this is.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Fair-Tax-Book-Goodbye/dp/0060875496/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1347053051&sr=8-1&keywords=fair+tax

http://www.amazon.com/FairTax-The-Truth-Answering-Critics/dp/B0027CSNOO/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1347053051&sr=8-2&keywords=fair+tax