Seperation of Church-n-State

Me thinks Mr Wrong stopped by the Unitarian church the other day.

Youre grouping atheists with perverts? WTf.. its you jesus lovers that go around buggering young children...

How was in meant to be interpreted?

The Church of England is an established church, but for a very long time all that has meant is that important State occasions like coronations are marked by Church ceremonies and that the Prime Minister interferes in the appointment of Bishops so, whatever it might have been in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (and it was hardly a theocracy even then) it is of no very total importance except as a civilizing influence now.

Fortunately, it has never committed itself to that extraordinary American concept, a 'Judeo-Christian belief system.' You mean you regard Jesus as the Son of God AND as a total imposter? You need a new Creed, I think.

The plan seems to be that while capitalism seems to work, nobody should interfere with the wonders of the market and the rich should take all they want. When it inevitably fails, however, it is such a danger that the taxpayers (not of course the rich) must pay through the nose to get it working again. Doesn't look like freedom to me - looks like highway robbery!

Would it? Are you absolutely sure?

Wouldn't we just then be taxing those who consume, and therefore wouldn't most people consume less than otherwise?

And with that collective decrease in consumption, wouldn't that slow down the economy?

And when the economy slowed, wouldn't capital lay off workers?

And when more workers were laid off, wouldn't that decrease their ability to consume collectively, further still?

Can you see the vicious circle that radical shift in taxation policy might be creating?

Let me give a a small example of what I mean about consumption taxation hurting the commonweal.

Maine taxes some kinds of consumer goods that New Hampshire does not.

Guess what that means for stores close to the border between Maine and New Hampshire that sell those consumer goods?

Blowback...

That's the thing about economic theories and the policies that come from them:

For every collective action there's a million individual reactions that mitigate the efficacy of that collective action.

Now, I am not completely dismissing your complaints about the policies we have today. There is a logic to the complain that taxing production taxes the productive and that logic is quite irrefutable.

But economics is the complex interaction of everyone combined.

People respond to the pressures that economic policies and taxation puts on them personally.

Sometimes, their personaly responses (which become collective responses) work out to everyone's benefit, and sometimes they don't.

I am not convinced that a consumption-ONLY taxation system would serve the commonweal especially well.

Convince me that my concerns are specious.

A sales tax works in a few but fair ways.

1- Sales increase because of growth in the economy. A sales tax is pro growth and progressive.

2- Products are only taxed once. This means that products sold as used or refurbished can only have the new parts taxed. This produces more consumers and jobs.

3- It currently costs the government $330 billion to make sure we comply. A sales tax would cost $80 billion. Only retailers would be paying [collecting] the tax. This would automatically create $250 billion in new revenue the first year alone.

4- "The Rich" would now have to pay taxes on things they currently write off as business expenses. [who writes tax law? I'm sure it's not janitorial engineers]

5- It's none of the government's business to know how much money you have or make. The current code punishes wealth and inheritance. I don't know about any of you but I'd like to leave my grand kids some money.

6- The government is too big. Yet they expect us to conserve and bite the bullet anytime they can't balance the budget. I think we need to cut government hand outs to the wealthy as well as the lazy.

7- This would bring so many companies back to America the entire world would be forced to live by a better code of ethics just to keep up and compete with our new sense of wealth from top to bottom.

8- This would end poverty. There would be no excuse for not having a job. Jobs would pop up out of nowhere because of all the new money in the common market.

9- How hard would it be for congress to raise the rate if we'd all be affected?

10- The poorest among us would be paying taxes and therefore be contributing to the pie. This is power. What we have now is a system that keeps people poor and only helps the powerful at the top. It's time to stop being jealous of some and expect more out of ourselves. The tax code is the source of socialist power and they need to be defeated.


The tax code is the vehicle for the Leftist Church.

This is where they stifle achievement and punish those who dare to dream. Their religion is one that worships death. The believe it's a right to kill their own offspring. We on the right just need to keep breeding and we will eventually take over out of sheer numbers. It's evolution at work. Only the strong will survive. If they really believed that they wouldn't insist on such a large nanny state.

Their faith is ever changing. Twenty years ago we all were going to die from lack of ozone. Twenty years before that, the New Ice AGE was going to kill us all. Now we're going to boil in the ever growing oceans that will cover the planet and the only thing left alive will be a Ford Explorer.

Hehehe

__________________
A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.
Thomas Jefferson

Another comic.

I often wonder if conservatives were all born yesterday or are maybe 12? Has anyone here ever worked at a cash business or any business for that matter. Has anyone here bought anything off the corner huckster. Give me a break, sales tax would require a cop at every business and an honest one at that.

"That's the misleading part. The wrong part is that the FairTax proponents assume full compliance with the FairTax -- no evasion, no black market in untaxed goods. To assume no shopkeep will ever sell a pack of cigarettes without adding and reporting the tax really does require a magic wand. It's one thing to tout this plan as releasing us from "pain and unfairness." But ending tax evasion? Why, that's downright un-American!"

Huckabee's Magic FairTax | The American Prospect

You liberals love licensing so much that this is the easier way of tracking money.

Instead you'd rather have what we have now.

You love having laws that are unenforceable but the idea that a universal tax that is transparent and easy to comply with makes you think it's too good to be true.

Most answers to problems are easy.

It's those who over think who make everything more expensive.

There is only one solution. Change the hearts and minds of the electorate. Your pomposity only reveals who you really are. You are not for freedom. You are for socialism. I just hope you understand what that really means.

It is much easier to track sales than income. How many contractors report all of their income?

How many people in general are reporting income. You'd like to see the little cash business watched. What about those large corporation retailers like WAL-MART/ TARGET / BIG-K etc.?

They can't hide from a sales tax. But you'd rather kill "mom and pop" right?

We know where you leftists really come from. You want the company and the state to be one entity. That's Fascist in my opinion. You'd rather call it Socialism. It's all tyrannical to me.

Duh, a comma seperates disperate thoughts that can lead to a common conclusion, ( for instance both ducks and cats eat, yet I did not call a duck a cat).......but now that you mention it.

__________________
the 'ol perfessor