Letter to John Linder

The most damning thing about Neil Boortz's and John Linden's so-called Fair Tax is those who are for it: Big business is for it, the Federal and State governments are for it and the Wealthy are for it.

And they should be. First it guarantees to government they will always get an increasing share of the pie, beginning on the over 1/3 of the economy they have now. Second, it exempts all the Princes of Industry and any business from paying anything. Finally, it does not tax wealth (nor does the income tax) and permanently re-establishes a feudalistic society. Those that have money do not pay any tax unless it is labeled a "consumer" product.

But it does have some good points, no doubt borrowed from the 1USATax, which is having the seller pay the tax instead of the buyer, a recent innovation. It doesn't do away with the income tax, because it requires a history of income to "qualify" for the complex rebate program that will buy the poor and tax the hell out of the middle class.

Does Mr. Boortz think T-bone Pickens ought to pay any tax when he buys out an old business, disassembles it, and ships the capital equipment to Mexico. Hell no! The stock market, you see, is an "investment" and is "not consumed" and is therefore, er... ah. (harumph) exempt from the Fair Tax. Only truck drivers, dental hygienists, school teachers, salespeople, office workers, plant workers and the like pay any tax. That way, the tax is somehow less, though the government gets the same amount of money.

Mr. Boortz is an expert on saying only one side of the story, because he has the finger on the opposition during his talk show. Mr. Linder only looks stupid; Mr. Boortz is stupid.

For example, he goes to great pains to point out that a multi-million dollar government study identified that 23% of whatever you buy is tax (which disagrees with Scientific American which computed it to be 34% of the GDNP for the year 2000). So, the reasoning goes, if you excuse all of the royalty from paying any tax, the royalty (due to their intrinsic kindness and threats of other royalty takeover) will reduce their price by 23%. The money will be collected on each gallon of milk from the housewives (but not the dairy, the farmer, or the distributor or retailer) and the world will be a better place. Even though the housewife is paying the money, she and her husband (who both work now) will not have to demand a salary to pay for the 23% that she has to pay; no doubt she can get it from her savings. Thus, although the U. S. has a whopping 23% consumer tax (just to START with) the price will be the same.

Sheer bull shit. But, I will admit, Boortz doesn't know it is untrue; he actually believes the tripe he is spewing. Linder, on the other hand, knows better.

The government is too fat. We all know that. We don't need weak-kneed negotiators going along to get along by proposing a diet that a fat man likes, particularly when the caloric intake is the same. The government doesn't have to do anything, but is guaranteed one third of every dollar that is spent in America. Such a deal!

The plan is flawed because it does not reduce the ratio of government to free enterprise. It is flawed because it doesn't repeal all other taxes. It is flawed because it doesn't require all citizens to pay the same relative burden. It is flawed because it doesn't permanently limit government size. It is flawed because it begs for bootleggers, plopping a whopping 23% tax in just the retail transaction. It is flawed because it will make the United States, which has to support the bloated government load on the backs of its workers, a higher cost place to produce anything. It is flawed because it simply does not make sense.

Now the income tax should be repealed. But leaving the door wide open for any new tax scheme is sheer folly. What about, an albumin tax? How about a waste elimination tax? What about a breath tax? All of these are still legal. So the unFairTax is just "another tax" and represents no reform at all.