How come the people that answered the question about the Huckabee's tax plan didn't have a clue about it?

Question

I have a big problem with Yahoo "Answers" letting people who are clueless answer questions like they are experts. In the case of the question from "donthatemecuzyouaintme" regarding Huckabee's promotion of the FairTax proposal, not one answerer knew that the proposal includes a monthly "pre-bate" to cover the cost of necessities, money you can spend anyway you want; this part of the plan is basically a handout to the working class and the idiot answerers were talking like only the rich would like it because of not having to pay income tax. NEWSFLASH: the truly rich DON'T PAY INCOME TAXES, they live off income from tax-free bonds and COLLECT the taxes we pay. That's why JPMorgan called the tax he created in 1913 an INCOME tax: because it was created to GIVE him and his rich friends an INCOME paid by workers (even workers that make a lot of money are still poor by the standards of the truly rich). Anybody who dirties their hands with a job is poor in their eyes.

Answer 1

Seems you're on to something.

Answer 2

Huckanomics

By David D. Kirkpatrick

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee’s Republican primary campaign has stood out from the Republican pack for its appeals to the economic anxieties of hard-pressed Iowans. At every stop he remind voters of his own humble roots— son of a firefighter who worked a second job, one generation from dirt floors and outhouses on his mother’s side— and tells that that he is the candidate who will look out for “the guy who can barely make the payments on his used pick-up truck.”

What are his ideas about how to help the poor and working class? In some ways, they are solidly conservative. He likes to talk about limiting lawsuits, pruning government regulation and cutting capital gains rates as a way to encourage the growth of small businesses.

And at almost every stop he champions a scheme called Fair Tax: plan to replace the income and payroll taxes with a national sales tax, then pay rebates to the poor or lower income. Devised by a group of wealthy Texas businessmen and some economists they hired a decade ago, the idea has never gotten much traction in Congress. But it has a significant cult following among grass roots conservatives.

Supporters like Mr. Huckabee tout it as a panacea that will reward work and productivity, penalize consumption, encourage savings and level the economic playing field.

“It un-taxes the poor,” Mr. Huckabee said Wednesday. “That really could help more people at the bottom than anything.” Critics, however, call it a gimmick, regressive, unworkable and far-fetched.

But in the final days of the campaign here, though, Mr. Huckabee has also shifted from simply emphasizing the taxes he cut in Arkansas to defending the ones he raised, trumpeting expanded state spending on the environment, roads, job training, education and children’s health care as improvements to the lives of hard pressed working people.

“There ought to be partnership programs,” he said, citing the example of co-pays and deductibles for patients covered by an Arkansas public health program he advanced. “Those kinds of things are appealing to me because it is not a hand out, it is a hand up.”

The same phrase was a favorite of another former Arkansas governor who liked to talk about the importance of personal responsibility and opportunity in government programs to help the poor: Bill Clinton.

This article was Written by David Kirkpatrick of the NEW YORK TIMES.

Personally I think this might work, a National Sales Tax instead of income taxes and you are absolutely right THE EXTREMELY RICH DO NOT PAY TAXES or they may pay some tax but not nearly enough in comparison with the income they receive, they use tax loopholes, and business expenses to get out of paying taxes.  If our Government would go and audit some of these big corporations they would find that half of the deductions they take are in the grey area as far as being actually legal.  Well I hope I don't meet the clueless you are talking about here.

Answer 3

You may be confusing "Don't have a clue" with "Don't agree with me."

Answer 4

I've researched the so-called "Fair Tax" extensively.  Before I get into my points on it, let's clear up some gross errors in your question.  First off, the top 5% of all income earners in the US pay over 80% of all taxes.  Your assertion that the wealthy pay no taxes is patently FALSE.  Even at the highest tax rates, few tax-free bonds offer a better rate of return than other taxed investments.  And what about the corporate CEOs who pull down hundreds of millions in salaries, stock options, golden parachutes and other income for what is often service to the company of questionable or dubious value?  That ain't "tax free bonds" in anyone's book and is and of itself the fruit of the companies' worker's labor.  And second, J P Morgan didn't create the income tax.  That's just plain silly.  The income tax was passed by Congress, as are ALL Federal laws in the US.

Now to my points on the grossly mis-named "Fair Tax."  It's a GREAT deal if you're wealthy. If you're poor or middle class it will clean your clock.

Answer the following questions, please. If you can, you will be the FIRST "Fair Tax" proponent to do so! I've yet to have a single one of them address them, including Neil Boortz who hung up on me on his radio show and called me an idiot. I've interspersed my own commentary on the issues but feel free to tear it up with FACTUAL information -- platitudes are worthless.

1. If you are going to do away with the IRS, who will collect the tax. (It will still be the IRS, we'll just give them a sweet sounding name.  You can call a t**d a rose if you wish, but it will still smell badly.)

2. How do you intend to deal with "prebate" fraud? (The IRS can't track income in real time -- it takes about 18 MONTHS to match W-2s with tax returns in the SAME computer system -- so how will they (or whomever) track family composition in real time?)

3. With a 30% tax on ALL new goods, how do you intend to deal with the massive black marketing that will result. (Any city or state with high tobacco or alcohol taxes will tell you that black marketing is a REAL problem.)

3a. OK, Congress dealt with that with tax stamps like on liquor and tobacco. (How about "The Audit of the New Millennium" now as armies of IRS agents descend on neighborhoods on trash day looking for evidence of untaxed goods. Or worse yet, burst into your home and rummage through your dresser looking for untaxed gruns and s*x toys?)

4. How do you intend to deal with financing of the $60,000 tax on a new $200,000 home -- a modest price in much of the nation? (The home is still only worth $200,000 since pre-existing homes aren't taxed, so the lenders won't lend the extra $60,000.)

4a. How will you deal with the collapse of the construction industry that will result from #4. (The resale market will take off, but new construction will grind to a halt.)

5. Ditto for the $6,000 tax on a new $20,000 car. (Same as #4.)

5a. How will you deal with the collapse of the auto industry in the US as a result of #5. (Before long US roads will look like Cuba with ancient pollution-belching relics being pushed along far past their sell-by dates.)

4b & 5b combined. Now that the US economy itself has collapsed following the collapse of its two primary movers, what next? (I'd LOVE to hear their answers on this!)

6. While you claim that the manufacturers of goods and the providers of services will reduce their prices due to the lack of corporate taxes, how to you plan on ensuring that that actually happens? (Sounds like quasi-communism with central control on prices. Shudder!)

6a. And what about corporations that are bleeding money like Ford and GM and pay no income taxes since they're LOSING money. Where will THEIR price cuts come from?? THEIR costs will actually RISE as money spent on infrastructure investment will be taxed so their prices will RISE substantially. Uh-oh, Houston we have a problem!

7. How to you explain to the single mother with 2 kids that the EIC that she was depending upon for basic survival is being replaced by the "prebate" BUT she'll now pay about $5,400 in taxes that she didn't have to pay before? (Virtually every penny she earns pays for essential goods and services. She'll be crucified by the added tax burden as she doesn't pay any income taxes now but WILL pay heavily under the co-called "Fair Tax.")

8. How do you plan to deal with the outcry from the World Trade Organization as untaxed American goods (those that exist anyway) flood the global markets, shutting out imports in the US and local products overseas? (Hmmm... Go back to corporate income taxes? Whoops! There goes a prime argument for the "Fair Tax!")

9. How will you deal with the Paris Hiltons, Steve Forbeses, Bill Gateses (insert favorite rich person's names 1,500 times) who will simply make their major purchases overseas and bring them into the US as used and therefore tax-free. (Remember the failed Luxury Tax from the 80s that put yacht dealers out of business in droves and tossed their employees onto the unemployment and welfare lines.)

10. Finally, how to you explain to the middle class taxpayer earning $50,000 per year with a family of 4 and paying almost no income tax that he now has to pay $10,000 in taxes MORE than his "prebate" amount? (I'd love to hear that one too!)

I could go on for hours on the unintended consequences of the grossly misnamed "Fair Tax" but my fingers are getting tired. In the end it's a SWEET deal for the wealthy (who tend to amass wealth, not spend it all) but would crucify the poor and bring the middle class to their knees. The economists who dreamed this up have no focus on the social impact of this and were told to ignore any impact other than the bottom line for the US government. Hardly "Fair" IMHO.

The ONLY good tax is a graduated income tax. It's the ONLY tax that adheres to the first rule of taxation: Make sure that the taxpayer can AFFORD to pay the tax.

The wealthy support the misnamed "Fair Tax" (or the Flat Tax) since they'd pay MUCH less in taxes. If you lessen the burden on one group you either must cut services or transfer the burden to another group. That leaves the poor and middle class to shoulder the burden of a tax cut for the wealthy. Sorry, but I flatly refuse to subsidize your next BMW!

Lastly, and most importantly, you obviously don't understand why the "Fair Tax" has languished in committee for over a decade in owe form or another.  It's simple, really, since its proponents have NO desire for it to be debated on the floor of the House.  If it is, it will quickly die an ignominious death as even the farthest right-wing hacks won't be able to support it and keep their jobs.  It's proponents have never actually requested that it be scheduled for debate!  They don't WANT debate on it.  It's strictly a political ploy so that they can say to their constituents, "Hey, I'm trying to make a difference, but nobody will move on it."

I patiently await YOUR response to the issues raised above -- but I'm betting you won't be able to address them with anything concrete.  Prove me wrong and you'll be the FIRST to do so.

Edit:  Hmmm...  An hour in and no comments.

Edit2:  Your linked site is worthless as far as the "Fair Tax" goes.  And you didn't bother to address any of the issues I raised, or even your grossly incorrect assumptions in your question.  I know about the so-called "prebate" and it's nowhere near $600 to $1,000 per month except for the largest families.  Most of us who post opposing views of the Fair Tax HAVE carefully reviewed it and are dissatisfied based upon that evaluation.  I would pay a LOT more in taxes under the plan, but I'm hardly wealthy.  Those making half a million or more per year would make out like bandits; but the average wage earner would be clobbered by it, even WITH the "prebate."

Answer 5

because they are just trying to get points and don't read or know how to spell.