Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Huckabee Defends 'Fair Tax'


Huckabee in Detroit. (AP).

By Perry Bacon Jr.
DETROIT -- Appearing at the Detroit Economic Club, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee largely avoided using the populist tone that has distinguished him from the other 2008 GOP hopefuls.

The candidate, who has called himself a representative of Main Street instead of Wall Street and criticized international trade agreements, instead highlighted a list of standard Republican ideas to improve the economy, such as reducing taxes and the number of lawsuits filed. Appearing in a state with a struggling economy, he used the speech to the city's business leaders to argue that he understands Michigan's plight and would improve it as president.

"In many ways, it was the manufacturing genius of Michigan that saved this country," he said, referring to the items built here during World War II. "Now it may be time for America to help save Michigan."

To loud applause, he did include one critique of the Republican Party.

"My party has got to understand that there are a lot of Americans who are concerned about poverty and disease and homelessness and hunger," he said. "The crisis is real and it's touching people's lives."

His speech didn't include any new policy proposals, but instead a strong defense of one of his central plans called the "fair tax," which would effectively create a 23 percent sales tax on all goods, replacing the current system run by the Internal Revenue Service. The idea has been widely criticized by both liberal and conservative economists, who argue it would result in the poor paying more than they currently do in taxes and encourage the creation of black markets to buy and sell goods and not pay the tax.

Unlike Democrats such as John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, Huckabee did not lay out an economic stimulus package that he said would hold off a possible recession, instead suggesting that a new tax structure would solve many problems.

"Creating a simple tax code in which there are no winners or losers picked changes the entire nature of the game," he told the crowd.

His focus on economics reflects a three-way race in Michigan that could be a major factor in the GOP nomination battle. While Huckabee will return to South Carolina today to campaign there before heading back to Michigan, both John McCain and Mitt Romney will spend much of the next four days looking for a win in Tuesday's primary. McCain won in 2000 and Romney is a Michigan native whose father was governor of the state.

In a sign of the shifting GOP race, Huckabee turned his attention in comments not to Romney or McCain, but attacked former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson, who blasted Huckabee repeatedly in a debate in South Carolina yesterday. Thompson had suggested Huckabee wasn't a strong backer of Ronald Reagan's legacy. Huckabee turned the Reagan legacy argument on Thompson, noting that the former senator supported Gerald Ford in 1976 and Howard Baker in 1980 when they ran for the Republican nomination against Reagan. The two are competing for the mantle of Southern candidate, particularly in South Carolina.

"I appreciate his recent conversion," Huckabee said of Thompson.

By Washington Post editors  |  January 11, 2008; 4:55 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: To Clarify 'Fairy Tale' Remarks, a Call to Sharpton
Next: Clinton Says Economy 'Isn't Working for Everybody'

Comments

(^_^)

Posted by: Randi | August 18, 2008 6:03 AM | Report abuse

(;_;)

Posted by: Marquise | August 18, 2008 12:52 AM | Report abuse

(-_-+)

Posted by: Jacqueline | August 17, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Hi... Very interesting site.

Posted by: Alexandria | August 17, 2008 1:52 AM | Report abuse

very interesting and informative

Posted by: Stacey | August 16, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

(;_;)

Posted by: Damien | August 16, 2008 8:56 AM | Report abuse

Give Fairtax a chance? I would LOVE it.

Just, be careful what you wish for.

Fairtax is based on the absurd notion that you can tax the federal government to pay for federal government. How rational people can sit there with a straight face, and say that is possible, is beyond me.

Neal Boortz claims (page 148 Fairtax Book) "the federal government itself will become a major taxpayer."

Thats like me paying myself 10,000 for cutting my own grass. Oh, I can pretend to pay it. I can write a check to myself. I can even deposit that check. I can do that everyday for a month. But I dont end up with 300,000 dollars.

So when Boortz and others are telling you that taxing the US Navy 4 billion dollars on a 12 billion dollar aircraft carrier, they are blowing smoke. Fairtax taxes every dollar of federal government purchases (and state, local, county).

This money simply CAN not mathematically materialize. So the tax rate can't be 23%. It would have to be 38% to make up for it.

And that kind of sloppy thinking is in all aspects of Fairtax.

FOr another example - fairtax wants a 23% of the 2 trillion dollar health care industry. A fairtax of 23% would be on all healthcare -- that means cancer patients -- taxed on surgery, on chemo, on hospitalization.

It means a tax on nursing home patients, knee replacements, kidney transplants, open heart surgeris. It means a tax on the parents of a childhood leukemia victim.

It means exrays -- taxed. Second opinion -- taxed. Lab tests -- taxed. ER care -- taxed. Doctor visits - taxed. Back surgeries - taxed. Prescriptions -- taxed. Diebetic supplies -- taxed.

Fairtax can't collect tax on health care either -- the outcry would be deafening. Congress would quickly rescind it, if it ever passed.

So Fairtax CAN not tax government -- and wont be able to tax health care. SO the tax rate would have to ve 50-60% on the rest of the economy.

Now, imagine a 50% sales tax on new homes, or new cars, or rent.

Imagine the outcry from those segments.

THis Fairtax can't work. It would decimate the economy.

Posted by: mdcurran | February 8, 2008 12:29 AM | Report abuse

It totally baffles me, that so many folks cannot see the forest for the trees.
Have so many never read the US Constitution?
All of the answers to today's problems are right there.
All of the "professional" economists spouting this great fair tax idea learned their witch-craft and snake oil ideas from "Flat Earth" professors. So obviously believe and base all ideas on the flat earth concept.

How about looking to the Constitution that the founders of our great nation put together after analyzing thousands of years of history, to learn what worked and what didn't.
There are tax and spend instructions already in place in the Constitution, and it's the total neglect of that instruction manual by both those we entrust in gov't and We The people that has allowed this Nanny state to get Way out of hand to the point that the state now tells us what little percentage of our property we are allowed to keep.
It was a simple concept of FREEDOM in all aspects of society that made this country GREAT.
It's fundamental Watson!
How about lets return to the fundamental principles of liberty, instead of putting bandaids on a patient[Our Country] dying of cancer?
Ron Paul 2008

Posted by: liberty10 | January 21, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

You naysayers should read this:

http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/New%20Kotlikoff%20Web%20Page/Revised%20Kotlikoff%20on%20Barlett%201-15-08.pdf

It shows how truly progressive the FairTax is and other interesting things.

Posted by: daniel6 | January 17, 2008 7:14 AM | Report abuse

From rhonshipm: "a derivative is a financial instrument, it is not a good or (financial) service and would not be subject to the fair tax." I guess if you put lipstick on a pig, it's no longer a pig, in the language of fair-tax FatCats.

Posted by: seattle_wa | January 16, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

seattle_wa, services are taxed. There must be some kind of fee for say trading on the futures market. Where are you getting the idea these fees won't be taxed?

Posted by: daniel6 | January 15, 2008 6:49 PM | Report abuse

Okay rhonshipm, a derivative is a financial service. So you are saying that "some services are more equal than others". If poor people get it, like a haircut, it's a "service" and you have to pay the tax. If only FatCats get it, like a financial service aka derivative, it's not a "service" and FatCat doesn't have to pay it.

Thanks for clearing up WhackJob Economics for me.

Posted by: seattle_wa | January 15, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Ok owens1, I'll just follow you and the other naysayers like a lemming.

On second thought, I'm better off following a true leader like Huckabee backed up by some of the best minds in economics listed here: http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/Open_Letter.pdf

Will some of you naysayers at least provide some links to back up what you say? I grow weary of the emotionally charged rhetoric; it proves nothing.

Posted by: daniel6 | January 14, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

Huck's "fair tax" is anything but fair. Our ability to pay is not equal, and 60% of businesses don't pay taxes. Those that can pay more should.

Next to Bush's, Huck's fair tax would be the biggest cut for the rich in history. Bush and the Republican Congress doubled the national debt with tax cuts for the rich and war for Iraq's oil, and Huck would double that. Next, Republicans will claim we can't afford "entitlements", then gut Medicare to ensure ordinary people have hard, shortened lives.

Posted by: owens1 | January 14, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Chuck 'em all, vote RON PAUL!
There's a man who knows economics, unlike the rest of our options.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/

Posted by: katie839 | January 13, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Alert *** Alert *** Alert ***

McCain, Romney, Thompson, Guiliani, Paul = 2 years
Huckabee = Only 3 weeks

That's how long it would take you to save up for a brand new 60^ LCD / Plasma Flat Screen TV with reclining chair and large cup holder for your nice cold beverage if they were President.

Huckabee is the ONLY one willing to scrap the IRS red tape and switch to the Fair tax. The Fair tax allows you to keep 100% of your paycheck, not 70% you keep of it now. If you make say $75,000 year then your paycheck rises by $325 per week and in ONLY 3 weeks you can buy that awesome 60" LCD / Plasma TV to watch your favorite TV shows (Super Bowl, World Series, World Championship, Indianpolis 500, Olympics, etc...)

If you do not mind flushing an extra $325 every week down the toliet, then go ahead and vote for McCain, Romney, Thompson, Guiliani and Paul want to keep the current tax system. That gives them far less pressure to be try to run a lean government.

The Fair Tax can ONLY happen if you and your friends and family vote for Huckabee. He is the ONLY presidentail candidate commiting to this for the American people. Would you rather flush $325 every week down the toliet or would you rather save that up in ONLY 3 weeks and get that brand new 60" LCD / Plasma high definition TV with recliner and cup holder! :)

Vote for McCain, Romney, Thompson, Guiliani and Paul if you want to become Poorer.

VOTE FOR HUCKABEE if you want to become Richer!!!

Posted by: vote4mikehuckabee | January 13, 2008 11:06 AM | Report abuse

For Chris Fischahs (2:15 am): Instituting the "fair tax" would not require repealing the 16th amendment; that amendment does not require an income tax, it merely allows it. (However, many supporters of the "fair tax" would repeal the amendment to make sure.)

For seattle_wa (10:31 am): Since a derivative is an abstract financial instrument, it is not a new good or service and would not be subject to the "fair tax." Your fat cats might pay a little something on the element of financial intermediation service involved in the deal.

General: Anyone seriously interested in the details could do worse than go to www.fairtax.org and then click on "Read More," "The Fair Tax Bill," and "Plain English Summary." Thirty-six typed pages of stimulating evening reading; print it out and take notes. Incidentally, the IRS would be replaced by a Sales Tax Bureau within the Treasury Department (Sec. 302) with various interesting powers.

Posted by: iyenori | January 13, 2008 12:43 AM | Report abuse

I love it, it's time for a change in our tax system!

Posted by: rhonshipm | January 12, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

There are two obvious misunderstandings in several of the above posts. 1) The fair tax is not on top of other taxes, but eliminates income, payroll, capital gains and inheritance. After deducting the income tax and payroll taxes the net cost of the fair tax would be zero. Goods would not cost any more and in fact they would probably cost less. 2) The 23% is 23% the same way that a 25% income tax bracket is a 25% income tax bracket. If a person has a taxable income of $100,000 and is in a 25% bracket, he pays 25% of $100,000. After he pays, he only has $75,000 left so the $25,000 he paid is 33% of the $75,000 he was able to keep but he still paid 25% of his taxable income.

Other important points include 1) 80% of all taxes would be collected by stores whereas the IRS only collects 75% or so of all income taxes owed. In other words fraud would obviously be reduced. 2) The big opposition comes from high powered lawyers, consultants, and others who feed off the complexity of the current system.
Jack

Posted by: jack.miller | January 12, 2008 11:12 PM | Report abuse

Go to Fairtax.org to learn the truth and see a list of college economic professors from all over this country that support this plan. Read "An Open Letter to the President, the Congress, and the American people." This Washington Post Article does not have all the facts correct.

Posted by: Kinlund | January 12, 2008 10:13 PM | Report abuse

FUNNY and true! (30 sec.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBfPb_cftFk

Posted by: lgander | January 12, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

ANY tax is more fair than the IRS. I paid $4,000 in this year that I never earned (then had to borrow the $4,000 to pay it). Is that fair??

I'll take the FAIR TAX ANY DAY....

Posted by: lgander | January 12, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Answers for johnklenert:

Of course the "fair tax" would replace Schedule A deductions. No income tax, nothing to deduct from.

Apparently it would also replace the SS tax. No payroll reporting, no SS deductions. How Huckabee plans to handle SS I don't know.

IRS workers would simply audit "fair tax" returns instead, just as state authorities crack down on non-payment of sales taxes now. Government implies taxation, and somebody has to do the collecting.

In war, the percentages presumably would be raised. It's happened before.

For more, check the appropriate websites.

Posted by: iyenori | January 12, 2008 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Everyone wants fair taxes...kudos to Gov.Huck's snake oil marketing.
Will this system: 1-replace mortgage and real estate taxes deductability? 2-Does this replace the social security taxes? 3-Do people still get a tax deduction on charitable donations? 4-If you scrap the IRS, will Gov Huck provide training for the displaced government workers or just send them out onto the streets with 1040 lined through on foreheads? 5-What happens in war time or will taxes henceforth be described as "surcharges?

Posted by: johnklenert | January 12, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

The so-called "Fair Tax" is too radical to propose as a campaign issue and it may well cost Huckabee the nomination. However I continue to believe this country needs serious reform at the federal level. Huckabee as Governor in Arkansas took on unpopular issues like school consolidation because he knew it needed to be done, while special interests like the "Club for Growth" are rallying against him because essentially they fear reform. Also for all Huckabee's faults, nobody would criticize him as a "flip-flopper". Mitt Romney by comparison has even flip-flopped on immigration reform from what he said in November, 2005.

Posted by: chrisbak52 | January 12, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

"Anyone who believes Huckabee is in la-la land."
-----
A more accurate statement would be, "Anyone that votes for a BIG Money Washington Insider will continue to live in the poor house IN la-la land"...

Posted by: lgander | January 12, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

A consumption tax could garner more support if services/labor were taxed at a lower rate than new products. More US dollars would remain in domestic circulation putting Americans to work in service and repair, and less would be sent overseas to purchase cheap consumer goods. Such a plan would appeal to the labor unions, the environmentalists and the economists.

Posted by: kristinlorraine | January 12, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

They evidently did not teach economics at Huckabee's ministerial school! Huckabee is JUST PLAIN WRONG on his tax idea. Anyone who believes Huckabee is in la-la land.

Posted by: ALMANOJODO | January 12, 2008 12:43 PM | Report abuse

You can tell who is exploiting the current tax structure by their phony arguments against the Fair Tax idea, even though the experts say it would be the most equitable system ever put forward.

The country needs men like Mike Huckabee who will represent ALL the people by standing against those for think that even more capitalism without conscience is what is needed in order for America to reverse the mess it is in.

Posted by: Andersod7 | January 12, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Take a GOOD look at Huckabee and the FairTax - why is it the FairTax studies only evaluate incomes up to $200,000? Because the effective tax rate for millionaires and billionaires under the FairTax is less than 1%. You can buy things of great value all day long without ever buying a new one. Think mansions, land, yachts, valuable coins, stamps, bullion, stocks and bonds - all of which increase his wealth and none of which is taxed. The things that are NEW that the super rich require will be provided them as perquisites by the businesses they control. Think company car, company house, company jet - all of which use our infrastructure and none of which is paid for by the entity using them. Why should Walmart pay for roads and bridges when they can get you to pay for free?
This is an attempt by the media to help hand the nomination to ANYONE but Dr. Ron Paul. Much as we'd like politics to be positive, it is in fact ruled almost entirely by negatives. For instance, what's the biggest negative the Republican Party is facing in 2008? Iraq - a staggering 70% of people favor IMMEDIATE withdrawal from Iraq. Who is the only candidate that doesn't have that negative? Dr. Paul, who advocates using those trillions of dollars to secure our border (perhaps against Saudis who were 20 of the 24 terrorists in 9/11) and rebuild our crumbling infrastructure which is far more worrying than the loss of Social Security. Hm, full employment, withdrawal from Iraq and a huge boost to our economy from rebuilding our infrastructure - which Democrat wants to run against that?

Posted by: lnardozi | January 12, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

"...for a man who doesn't believe in evolution and thinks the earth is only 6,000 years old, but for the sane, it sounds pretty foolish."

Mike does not claim that. SOME people interpret the Bible in LITERAL terms which is wrong - but EVEN the Bible doesn't say 6,000 years. Stop discriminating against ALL Christians because are wrong.

Are ALL white guys wrong because you are?

Mike Huckabee is the ONLY person running NOT paid off by corporate elites and Washington insiders. EVEN Rupert Murdoch (who owns Faux News) does NOT want Huckabee elected. The VOTERS can cave in to the BIG MONEY or they will elect Mike Huckabee.

I hope the common man wins this and the Democrats in Michigan switch over (because there's no delegates for them) to Mike Huckabee to send the message loud and clear.

Posted by: lgander | January 12, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Michigan & South Carolina,

America's only choice for President is clear. Don't be suckered in by the elite media's propaganda. Tens of millions of dollars was donated by Wall Street to purchase the White House in this election. Some candidates are just too old or too liberal to win. Please remember, the rest of the country is waiting and depending on you (Michigan & South Carolina) to give us the opportunity to elect Huckabee and say no to big government that does not work, Wall Street, and the elite media. Those Americans who never had a set at the table, who don't have the big money or a voice in this election are waiting to cast their vote for Mike Huckabee. Please provide America's true conservatives the opportunity to vote with you and elect Mike Huckabee President. No more Presidents from Camelot!

Posted by: d_shoup | January 12, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Huckabee claims to represent "Main Street," but the only people his "Fair Tax" would benefit work on Wall Street and live on Easy Street. The so-called Fair Tax is a regressive tax that lifts the tax burden even further from the rich and places it squarely on the middle class. Spare me simplistic rants about how much more you will take home. The very goods most heavily taxed will have to be the most frequently purchased if the tax is to provide enough revenue for the government to operate. This is a good formula for a man who doesn't believe in evolution and thinks the earth is only 6,000 years old, but for the sane, it sounds pretty foolish.

Posted by: ElectricBill | January 12, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

So let me get this straight.

FatCat A buys his derivative for $1zillion, and he pays 23 percent tax, or 30 percent, or whatever, on the transaction.

Then he sells this same derivative to FatCat B for $2zillion, and once again pays 23 percent tax (or was it 30 percent? I forget) on the second transaction. Oh, wait, he has to lay off all the workers at the company(ies) owned by the derivative, first, to justify increasing the price.

And all this improves the economy, how?

Posted by: seattle_wa | January 12, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Who actually believes that the IRS collects 100% of what's owed in income taxes? I hear of people cheating all the time.

The RICH do NOT like the Fair Tax because they have their ways of hiding income, under reporting, or using the 'shell game' of hiding income (cheating).

I bet the Fair Tax would bring in all the stolen revenue and who knows? It could be MUCH lower than the 23%....

Huckabee is the ONLY common-sense candidate running.

Posted by: lgander | January 12, 2008 7:56 AM | Report abuse

FAIRLINGTONBLADE-Since you like number Games:

Three people share a $30 Feast!
Each contributes $10-OK?
Special that Night! $5 Off!

When waiter gives them the Rebate-They give him $2 more, and take back $1 each!

Now, they have each spent $9, and have given the Waiter $2 as well.

3 X $9= $27, and $2 = $29!

Where did a dollar go?

Posted by: rat-the | January 11, 2008 11:45 PM
_______________

You do NOT ADD $2 to the $27. You SUBTRACT it to get the $25 (because with the rebate, it's only $25 - not $30).

theRAT- you must be a liberal the way you work your math.

Posted by: lgander | January 12, 2008 7:50 AM | Report abuse

Never mind the tax plan. Huck, what's with the dazzling gold watch and gold cufflinks? Populists don't campaign in French cuff shirts. And how about a $29.95 Timex around your wrist?
Then we'll start listening to you.

Posted by: rabeer | January 12, 2008 4:57 AM | Report abuse

From Fact Check:

Huckabee escalated his misleading claims about cutting taxes, saying he cut taxes for the first time in the history of the state of Arkansas, which is untrue. Others put through tax cuts before he did. Overall, Huckabee raised taxes.

Huckabee claimed that highways in Arkansas had gone from the "worst road system in the country" to the "most improved" in the ratings of a trucking magazine. He failed to mention that despite the improvement they remained fourth from the bottom on the "worst" list.

The Boston Globe last week had an excellent article on why the flat tax is a very faulty plan ... often supported by members of the flat earth society.

Note: its always "cut taxes" and seldom "cut spending" - remember the GOP bridge to nowhere?

Posted by: waterbirds | January 12, 2008 4:49 AM | Report abuse

Calculate how much "you" can "save":
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=calculator

I say save because the fair tax plan gives you the option to save more money, buy used items, earn more interest on savings etc.. If you are frugle...

They ( http://www.fairtax.org ) also give a list of candidates who support the fairtax idea as well as some "myth" busters!

Posted by: elvis | January 12, 2008 4:07 AM | Report abuse

Shazam!

The "Fair Tax" would require the repeal of the 16th Amendment, and the addition of a new Constitutional Amendment. I don't see that happening!!!

$3.10/gal gas --> $4.00/gallon

(Not to mention the fact that the real tax rate to fund the existing Federal government expenses - salaries, military, Social Security, Medicare/aid, etc. is closer to 53%... but whatever.)

Clarification for Huck - the Devil is actually in the details.

Posted by: ChrisFischahs | January 12, 2008 2:15 AM | Report abuse

FAIRLINGTONBLADE-Since you like number Games:

Three people share a $30 Feast!
Each contributes $10-OK?
Special that Night! $5 Off!

When waiter gives them the Rebate-They give him $2 more, and take back $1 each!

Now, they have each spent $9, and have given the Waiter $2 as well.

3 X $9= $27, and $2 = $29!

Where did a dollar go?

Posted by: rat-the | January 11, 2008 11:45 PM | Report abuse

The fair tax is not likely to happen soon, but, without Mike it probably never happens. The tax is revenue nuetral and will improve the picture for business and for poor and somewhat for middleincomers too. Change is only preferred by babies with dirty diapers and even then they scream about it. I too applaud Mike for the tax proposal, and, the principles he will govern by. I hope the people get a chance to speak and don't get too brainwashed by the TV and the political parties. What's so wrong with a populist (the people) that's interested in doing what is correct for the country. Sound like vertical politics has begun. My bumper slogan in 2012, assuming Mike is elected this year will be "Lordy Lordy no 10-40"

Posted by: marydonhill | January 11, 2008 11:22 PM | Report abuse

One hopes that, absent a Huckabee campaign effort to defend itself, the media will counter Romney attacks by pointing out how, at Bain Capital, Mr. Romney used offshore corporations (and continues to) in order to avoid U.S. taxation, and he fee-milked acquired businesses before firing workers and taking them into bankruptcy, to amass his great $250,000,000 wealth.

So, when you compare how Mr. Huckabee's visionary FairTax advocacy compares to Romney's interest in the current tax system, it's pretty easy to see who will lead us out of tax slavery - the $265 billion annual tax code compliance costs representing 5 billion wasted hours, annually.

Posted by: ih2005 | January 11, 2008 11:12 PM | Report abuse

Can John McCain pull conservatives together with his prior liberal voting record? Not a chance!

Can Fred Thompson pull conservatives together with his prior record absent of designing and improving programs and systems that improved the every day lives of all Americans? No way!

Can Mitt Romney buy the White House? Maybe!

Avoid the elite media's "Rush", study Mike Huckabee's real record, and support "Huck" early!

Posted by: d_shoup | January 11, 2008 11:03 PM | Report abuse

Can John McCain pull conservatives together with his prior liberal voting record? No a chance!

Can Fred Thompson pull conservatives together with his prior record absent of designing and improving programs and systems that improved the every day lives of all Americans? No way!

Can Mitt Romney buy the White House? Maybe!

Avoid the elite media's "Rush", study Mike Huckabee's real record, and support "Huck" early!

Posted by: d_shoup | January 11, 2008 10:38 PM | Report abuse

Re: Zukermand

Here here!

Here's a point to any of the Huckabots. Go to any state in the union. If you spend $100 and the sales tax is 5%, then you pay $5 tax. Name me one, I repeat ONE, state that calculates it the "Fair Tax" way.

It's a simple matter of math (I'll avoid the obligatory cheap shot). 150 is 50% higher than 100. 100 is 33% less than 150. If you're trying to dupe the masses, you put the math the other way.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | January 11, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

VISITME-LOL! The Luxury Tax, was repealled largely because for things such as Ocean Going Yachts, it amounted to Huge business for the Carribean Yacht Brokers, and Part time work for captains to ferry the Foreign Purchased Yachts to the US!

Posted by: rat-the | January 11, 2008 9:36 PM | Report abuse

Hey, "Vijay", this isn't one of your "Fairtax" meetups or a local wingnut talk show. If 100 out of 100 people on the street would miscalculate the tax on a $100 pre tax item as $23, then you are misleading them.

There is endless evidence your 30% rate is woefully inadequate. Other than that paid hack at BU, every economist that's ever bothered to give it a passing thought says it's obvious.

"We currently spend about 270 billion preparing our tax forms."

You're badly misinformed.

You clueless Boortz robots are boring. Please, please, please run a GOP candidate on the "Fairtax". I imagine I'll have to listen to this crap forever if it doesn't get a thorough putting out of its misery like only a national campaign can provide.

Posted by: zukermand | January 11, 2008 9:23 PM | Report abuse

The current Republican situation in terms of voter preference, is about as stable as the weather lately. The fact that a block of indie's in NH can change the race so much really says alot. McCain who was basically unelectable 2 months ago, is now the front runner because of the chain reaction which caused a perfect storm. Huckabee set it off by being born with (evangelical silver spoon in the mouth) start on 2nd base in Iowa. Now McCain is the flavor of the week until someone comes along and wins another primary. If Thompson already had some wind in his sail,he would probably be a lock in SC, with his great "meet the virgins" quip last night. It seems that the best one liners still get alot of mileage of late. I'm convinced if Huckabee hadn't gotten his "Jesus was too smart to run for office" line off, we wouldn't be here today discussing McCain or Huckabee for that matter. So if you still think the process works,I agree with you. Only because the CONSTITUTION works. Our lame reasons for electing officials in general remains just that,lame. Only a relativly small percentage of the electorate don't fall into the "bandwagon" traps laid by candidates. Huckabee is by far the worse offender in that category, followed closely by the drive by media. Those salivating dogs are the biggest threat to democracy today. But again thank God for the CONSTITUTION which protects the coutry from itself. It truly was inspired by God, and is the only saving grace at times. I shudder at supporting any candidate when my opinion is only as valid as the media will allow, and in the end my participation in the process is minimized because of the swooning media watching public.

Posted by: montrealslim2002 | January 11, 2008 9:21 PM | Report abuse

The Fair Tax has been analyzed and scrutinized and has been found to be an effective, efficient and far less expensive method of collecting a tax. It also helps the middle class and less privileged as it has a prebate built in. If you do not pay income tax at all, then you can save big unless you are a big consumer. Your over spending decides your tax...

It is the best system. Sadly US politics and the press have criticized Gov. Huckabee's proposal, but it is funny that people like Senator Thompson have borrowed the same idea!

Posted by: liz4 | January 11, 2008 8:32 PM | Report abuse

zukermand: You are wrong the FairTax is a 23% tax. If the tax were thought of as tax exclusive rate you would be right. But it is wrong to think of it like this.
Here's why: Lets say for the sake of argument that you currently make $125 a week and your income is taxed at 20%. You would be left with $100 to spend however you like. If the FairTax were enacted at 20% just to make computation easier. If this person went to the store and spent his $125 just 20% would be going to the government. Not 25% as you would suggest using this model.
Your second point about it not replacing the current tax system is also wrong. There is no evidence that 23% rate won't be enough.
The FairTax would lift the tax burden on all of us significantly. We currently spend about 270 billion preparing our tax forms. Many people evade paying taxes and this causes a loss in money as well as the cost the IRS pays to reclaim this money. With the FairTax no company has to think about the tax implications of a decision and American companies will return to America as FairTax will provide a level playing field for our companies.

Posted by: VijayVirmani | January 11, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

Highly doubtful that Huckabee's Fair Tax" will stand up in a reasonable general. It'll be scrapped if he actually got the nomination.

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: parkerfl | January 11, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Mike is committed to make the Fair Tax happen. He did also state that it will be a fight to get it through Congress but said it can be done. I support the fair tax because first of all, the billions of dollars it costs to run the IRS every year would then be crushed. We would also save millions every year in the lawsuit costs to prosecute those not complying, and there are a lot. There are people who say there is no law that states we are required to pay income tax. In the early 1900's it is said that they snuck the bill by Congress during a holiday. Who knows. But the Fair Tax will then tax people on what they buy. Pimps, prostitute, drug dealers, under-the-table workers, they all pay. No loop- holes for the rich or the sneaky. But yet a way for a thrifty American to save if need be. No more write offs for Hummers for the rich stating they are a business weight and class vehicle.(don't mind the shine and over-sized tires)If you spend a lot, you pay more. Makes sense. Also no tax bracket penalty for working harder. It makes sense.

I am with Mike Huckabee

Dan Campbell

Posted by: marinepatriot | January 11, 2008 8:18 PM | Report abuse

I applaud Mr. Huckabee for having the curage to use the "Fair Tax" as part of his platform. Most of our politicians are afraid they will lose control of the power that our current tax system gives them. I like the idea of doing away with the I.R.S. and reducing the size of government. I also like the idea that if a person can afford a $10 million dollar yacht, then this person will be putting 2.3 million dollars into the tax system. For those who do not understand the "Fair Tax", I would encurage you to research it. There are a couple of books out on the subject. CARjr.

Posted by: visitme | January 11, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

I applaud Mr. Huckabee for having the curage to use the "Fair Tax" as part of his platform. Most of our politicians are afraid they will lose control of the power that our current tax system gives them. I like the idea of doing away with the I.R.S. and reducing the size of government. I also like the idea that if a person can afford a $10 million dollar yacht, then this person will be putting 2.3 million dollars into the tax system. For those who do not understand the "Fair Tax", I would encurage you to research it. There are a couple of books out on the subject. CARjr.

Posted by: visitme | January 11, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

I applaud Mr. Huckabee for having the curage to use the "Fair Tax" as part of his platform. Most of our politicians are afraid they will lose control of the power that our current tax system gives them. I like the idea of doing away with the I.R.S. and reducing the size of government. I also like the idea that if a person can afford a $10 million dollar yacht, then this person will be putting 2.3 million dollars into the tax system. For those who do not understand the "Fair Tax", I would encurage you to research it. There are a couple of books out on the subject. CARjr.

Posted by: visitme | January 11, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

I applaud Mr. Huckabee for having the curage to use the "Fair Tax" as part of his platform. Most of our politicians are afraid they will lose control of the power that our current tax system gives them. I like the idea of doing away with the I.R.S. and reducing the size of government. I also like the idea that if a person can afford a $10 million dollar yacht, then this person will be putting 2.3 million dollars into the tax system. For those who do not understand the "Fair Tax", I would encurage you to research it. There are a couple of books out on the subject. CARjr.

Posted by: visitme | January 11, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

ALERT!

Wouldn't you want to take home $310 more each week if you made say $75,000 a year?

Can you envision that? $320 MORE every week after week after week! Just think of how much you can save or pay off a debt or save up to buy something you wanted? Or to get by without having to work two jobs!

If you want to have this you MUST vote for Mike Huckabee in upcoming elections. No other presidential candidate is offering to do this! Only Huckabee is commiting to do this.

Of course sales tax is higher 7% to 26% on only "New" items. But just think how easy it would be now to save up to pay for that if you absolutely had to buy something new!

With Huckabee's Fair Tax plan "YOU" have decision over what you want to do with your money, not the governemnt. Now the government steals it and uses it on whatever they want. You have to work till middle of May to finish paying for taxes.

But if you are super rich and you do not mind giving the goverment an extra $320 more a week then go vote for someone else.

VOTE MIKE HUCKABEE & you'll walk home a happy man or woman with a bigger paycheck!

Posted by: vote4mikehuckabee | January 11, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

America desperately needs a better way to tax its citizens than the mess we have now, and just tinkering with the current system won't work. The Fair Tax is the brainchild of America's most eminent economists at the major universities. The only ones against it are the cheaters who don't want to pay their fair share of taxes, leaving the burden on the rest of us. Governor Huckabee is to be commended for his courage in supporting the Fair Tax and deserves to be supported with a victory in the Michigan primary on Tuesday.

Posted by: Andersod7 | January 11, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

I want a "Cage Match" between Dr. NO and Huckster on this issue. Both have some good points, and the other Exec.s can determine the winner!
Truth though, when you account in the Money wasted supporting the Un-Documenteds, and the money not collected on the 10 Million some odd Jobs not being Payrolled, You wind up with over 200 Billion Dollars that can be trimmed off the 23%! Get all Payroll, or at least 95% paying the proper Employment contributions, and get a good chunk of the other 5% at retail, and we will have a much better system than the failed one now!

For those paying attention, Yeah, I did include Payroll taxes in the conversation, BUT, truth be told, the need for much of the Payrolling deductions will now be greatly reduced, making Illegal Employment, Much less attractive!

But, NOW it will no longer be that big a deal to just verify Legallity in the first place, the savings are no longer there!

Now, it will be a simpler maner of forcing Payrolling, to force ID's to cash said Payrolled checks!

Posted by: rat-the | January 11, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

For a man that professes to help the poor and working class, his tax would take more out of pocket than the current system. The way to rebuild the American manufacturing base and not worry about China cheating is a new tax.
A flat 5% redistribution of income tax should be levied on corporations and individuals. The money will be disbursed via a bank issued credit card with corresponding photo-id. Voting registration, additional security services (like airport pre-clearance with background check), census should all be available. A full share goes to Americans 18-65, a third share for seniors and dependents, a 2% share for wards of the state. The money can only be spent on American made goods, medical (incl cosmetic), education (incl parochial), public transportation, adoption, and funeral costs. The Reagan investment tax credit should be passed to quicken the rebuilding of our manufacturing base. No tax credits allowed against redistribution tax. Most Democrats and Huckabee have received this and given back the same computerized reply, thank you and send money.

Posted by: jameschirico | January 11, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

"which would effectively create a 23 percent sales tax on all goods"


It's 30% and, no, it doesn't "replace the current system", not by a long shot.

Posted by: zukermand | January 11, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company