Do you like Huckabee's Fair Tax plan?

Question

I know Huckabee did not design the Fair Tax plan, but, he is a candidate of interest that doeas support the plan...

Answer 1

This is a great question, I am more likely willing to talk about the response to the question though. I find the responses really interesting. ( I will be brief with this though...)

I find the question being answered with yes, most likely because of the "Fair Tax" label, and who doesnot want a better and fairer tax system?

I find an answer for "I don't like the man." Just basic close mindedness. The issue was irrevelant. Wow...most people should not be allowed to vote for they haven't a clue. Closemindedness is blind.

But what I really found refreshing was JSKMARDE'S reply.
Hey, it offered a link to peruse the Fair Tax plan. It also had articles of pros and cons. But it was the fact that I had not followed the issue. And, yet, I too have for so long wanted an easier taxing system. What we have now is incredulously flawed and imbalanced and wrong.

I say thank you for the question, but thank you JSKMARDE for providing me with a means to give an answer based on what it is and not my emotional response, nor the usual inept human ability to associate good sounding headings and titles, but not the facts and figures needed to have accurate insight in order to anwer.

After reading JSKMARDE's response and hypertexting over to her provided site, then I agree with her....there is the typical misleading title, which is an extreme flaw, but I like Huckabee. But It amazes me as to why are our politicians are opposed to truthful revelations?

What is so sinsister about truths?

The tax, as far as I can conclude, is a 30% tax. But I question why would this nation need such a high across the board taxation system? Why not have a much lower taxation system, with not write offs? And for greedy Corporations doing business overseas, counter that with a higher duty and taxation on not only their business but their return imports.

Why not have all...rich, poor, and inbetween paying a straightline percentage?

Is that a bit too simple, or would the leadership of this nation have to squabble a bit too much over how to appropriate the funds?

They already have shown an inability to run the finances of America. Social security trust fund was treated as an IOU piggy bank, until its surplus was squandered away. It was borrowed from and never paid back. Evidently they had no intentions of such.

This nation needs healthcare, and education. I guess we have to join the armed services to get this. And when we get ourselves all blown up, they give us care at dysfunctional places like Howard Reede Medical Center.

They have health care provided for themselves but it is not available for over 1/3 of this nation. (Roughly 100 million). And the vast majority that do have it, it has such a is sub-parred standard of quality to it, that it almost is laughable.

Pharmaceutical companies put poison out on the market collect a few 30 billion buck, pay out a measely 10 million in settlements and then go on to the next scam. Like creating a disease so as to market more of their drugs. (E.G Restless leg syndrome), the medicine that is being touted for that "ew darling" was to help those with Alzheimer's. Go figure?

Yet, we can give 250 million to rebuild Hezbollah's Lebannon, we can give 10 billion away to Pakistan each year throw hundreds of millions away for the UN each year, with an outcome that is no better than the previous years outcome.

.....Our country needs something more than just bandaids. Has anyone looked at the national debt lately? And we are being moved by emotions, left wing, right wing, inept human ability to research and study the facts at hand....and most of all the nightly news telling me of Anna Nicole Smith, or George CLooney's askewed looney leanings. Yeah, ladies he might be rich goodlooking and a catch, but honestly....we need men and women of moral fiber and tenacity with grounded roots in competence, and not fairy tale Prince Charmings. Al Gore is only partially right. As far as I am aware the last Ice Age has been gone for a while now.

We as Americans are letting ourselves be too divided over insignificance to be able to agree on the color of importance.

And we don't need any more of the status quo! I believe we better start looking at the facts, and not be lulled by the sweet titles and not be misled by our emotions of liking or disliking.

Thank you for the question host, and thank you for your informed response, and for provided us with the ability to see the topic's facts rather than just guess and shoot off into the dark as usual, JSKMARDE.

Answer 2

The Fair Tax is not Huckabees idea. There is a movement that's been organizing out there for the past few years. So he can't take credit for it.
And most candidates support it with the exception of 2 or 3.
You can view the info at www.fairtax.org.

Answer 3

I am not in favor of the Fair Tax. The stated goal of this plan has always been to be "revenue neutral". That means that you cause great dislocations in the economy as institutions adjust to the new structure. There will be new sets of winners and losers (though I expect the politically connected to still do fine). You'll still need a massive bureaucracy to to administer it. Meanwhile, assuming that it is indeed revenue neutral (no guarantees since the revenue base could be significantly shaken up), you'll still have the same overall drain on the productive economy.

About the only gain that you *might* get is to make many of the tax accountants get productive jobs - this is assuming that tax returns are simplified or eliminated.

The only tax reform that I endorse is the reduction or even elimination of taxes. But caution, if we reduce taxes but do not cut spending (as has done the Bush administration), you're either only deferring taxes or allowing the government to pay for its bills by creating new money and debasing the currency.

Answer 4

First off, it's is not Huckabee's plan. It is legislation that was introduced by Congressman John Linder. Huckabee just supports it.

In a nutshell : The plan would be the most monetarily liberating thing for the American people. It removes the IRS and income taxes. It replaces them with a 22% sales tax on all NEW purchases (if you buy a used car, you don't pay tax). You don't pay taxes on household necesities like food.

There is alot of information about is, and a humerous book written by Neal Boortz and congressman Linder. Typically, the government doesn't support it do to the power it will give back to the people.

Answer 5

Fair is in the mind of the beholder. What may seem fair to one may not seem fair to someone else. I don't think Huck's idea would work. I used to like Huckabee but the more I get to know about him the less I like him.

Answer 6

I personally prefer a flat tax. A national added value tax would shift a large part of the tax burden to the middle class. It could depress the national economy by causing people to put off buying new durable items such as cars, refigerators, and, televisions. Not to mention spawning a huge black and, grey market.

Answer 7

I was probably a supporter before Huckabee was. It would be a great catalyst to our economy and a catalyst will be sorely needed soon.

Answer 8

Yes I would be for a Fair tax

Answer 9

if they can figure out a way to not double tax money people already have by instituting the federal tax on products you buy with money already taxed I think it is a better system. There would also have to be a way to insure in future congresses they are not allowed to go back and institute an income tax on top of the product tax. and this alone shows me it will probably never happen.

Answer 10

Y E S, It is really a excellent plan! These are several websites that I have found, hope they help!!
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer
http://www.scotbrit.blogspot.com/2007/05/what-is-
fair-tax.html
http://www.wethepeopleforfairtax.com/fairtax.asp