Anti Bridenstine ads

[inactive]

They are not a joke, they are examples. Obviously they are not true life examples and as many people have pointed out there are many different factors that go into figuring out what an effective tax rate is. I was trying to assist the OP with the basic idea without them having to do searching and digging through the propaganda.

Here is the pro-fair tax http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer

Here is the anit-fair tax http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/08/22/why-the-fair-tax-will-fail/ That is just one of the articles, someone wants the details find it out for themselves.

I posted a similar example in another thread when someone asked why the Fair Tax is opposed, and I too caught hell for it. It's amazing the flak you catch for simply presenting another perspective (even if you personally don't agree with it).

 

[tntrex]

Would a flat one be better? Or maybe a simple tax like Reagan did? All these loopholes/credits/etc are an issue.
.

 

[poopgiggle]

words

neal boortz lol

 

[poopgiggle]

Would a flat one be better? Or maybe a simple tax like Reagan did? All these loopholes/credits/etc are an issue.
.

You're creating a false dichotomy.

Capping tax expenditures would be a GREAT way to increase tax revenue in a fairly progressive way. It's also an idea supported by actual economists who actually study economics. And no flat/simple tax nonsense required.

I've also heard people argue that eliminating a lot of tax expenditures entirely is a good way to go, which would have the added benefit of reducing enforcement costs but it's more politically risky.

 

[Fatboy Joe]

Would a flat one be better? Or maybe a simple tax like Reagan did? All these loopholes/credits/etc are an issue.
.

It did signficantly lower taxes and got rid of a lot of deductions, but I would hardly say it simplified the tax structure. The enactment of §469 is a significant game changer that definitely didn't simplify things.