Why the FairTax isn't and won't be. Here's something better ..

Jeff Bone jbone at deepfile.com
Thu Apr 10 10:25:43 PDT 2003

On Thursday, Apr 10, 2003, at 09:07 US/Central, Russell Turpin wrote:

> A transaction tax is simpler than the retail tax,

Yes, yes, we discussed this ad nauseam months ago.  And I agree with 
you on some points.  I am unconvinced that FairTax is the recipe for 
doom that you and Woody seem to think it is;  it's been analyzed for a 
very long time by people that are economically a lot more sophisticated 
than any of us on this list.  (Not that argument from authority is 
convincing in itself, but neither is vague assertions of economic doom 
if you simply shift the price tag of gov't around.)

Bottom line is this:  I don't see a transaction tax proposal on the 
table, and I'm not interested in supporting idealistic endeavors that 
have no foreseeable practical consequence.  The FairTax effort has been 
ongoing for several years now, and it's starting to get some amount of 
momentum.  Transaction tax isn't even to square zero, and we need 
substantial tax reform sooner rather than later.  I think that FairTax 
has a reasonable if outside shot, and of the three options (status quo, 
flat tax, FairTax) I'll pick FairTax.  I'd be happier with flat tax, 


More information about the FoRK mailing list