Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (153414)	10/15/2002 6:36:51 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1585457

How would you do that? By exempting essentials. If you don't tax the things these people spend their $23,000, they don't pay tax. Conversely, those people who now pay zero tax (dope dealers, hookers, "the mob", gamblers, etc.) would have to pay tax if they spent their money. I don't purport to know all there is to know about it; but the concept of a NST is awfully appealing. There are a number of people with Joe's view of it (no exemptions, period), and they're concerned about keeping the concept pure. But the most complex NST imaginable would still have a tiny fraction of the complexity of the current income tax system. Imagine this: The federal government totally funded by a 25% NST. If expenditures go up, the tax rates go up. If expenditures go down, the tax rates goes down. The states would rapidly jump on board. When it is over, you've got a 50% combined sales tax replacing ALL income taxes. It sounds bizarre, but there is something attractive about putting ALL CPAs and tax attorneys out of business...