Talk:Predicted effects of the FairTax

message: This article is part of the FairTax article.  Information will be moved into here from the main page to accomidate a WP:SS format.  While migrating, information will be duplicated in an effort to switch to the new format.  Morphh 00:35, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved information over.. Guess we need to write an intro. Morphh 19:41, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Cielomobile, you are talking about a "Predicted problems of the FairTax" sub-article, yet THIS article is NOT named "Predicted benefits...", but rather is named "Predicted effects...", nor is there, as Morphh suggests, any real reason that it cannot be renamed.  Is there any reason not to simply modify this one?  Or, better yet, copy it to a subpage of your user page and edit it there, so as to not give Morphh a heart attack from looking at the partial changes? --Scott McNay 06:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't suggesting creating a new sub-article, but just a section in the predicted effects article about predited problems (since there's a section for predicted benefits). -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 00:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, gotcha.  So go for it. --Scott McNay 06:28, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What would be a predicted problem that is predicted by both (having little rebuttal) that is not already covered in the "other effects"?  I guess that goes to problem of the term "predicted".  We're using it as generally predicted by both and Cielomobile is saying predicted by one side or the other.  In which case would cover most of the material as a "prediction".  Not sure how best to word it.  Morphh (talk) 11:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review of article, continued 

message: In an effort to address Cielomobile's concerns, I've moved the "Transition effects" section into this article, which is mainly criticism.  I've also added a section for "Distribution of tax burden" with a short summary of the dispute and a link to the main article.  Morphh (talk) 23:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expanded article 

message: One problem that I see with sub-articles is that some people people may never look at the main artcle for some reason.  Perhaps the article should be modified to take this into account, maybe by modifying the header comment ("This article describes the predicted effects of the FairTax. For the main article, see FairTax") to describe what biases may occur due to not reading the main article.  --Scott McNay 06:12, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is a good idea.  Morphh (talk) 16:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I made the change suggested.  Morphh (talk) 21:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main article 

message: If money earned in the U.S. is only taxed when it is spent in the U.S., won't that encourage American tourists to vacation outside of the U.S.? Let's say you want to buy a $2,000 vacation somewhere. You can spend $2,000 in Las Vegas and pay $460 in Federal taxes on it (23%), or you can fly to Mexico for $300, spend your $2,000 in Mazatlan, and have $160 left over to pay 8% sales taxes in Mexico. Same for immigrant laborers. They work here and spend at or below the poverty level, and then send the rest of their income, which has never been taxed, back to their home country. Sure, you can tax wire transfers, but I'd think there'd be a whole lot of money smuggling going on. — Jonathan Kovaciny (talk|contribs) 14:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure to what level it will encourage personal behavior but what you describe is correct.  You also have the other half where tourists and income spent in the U.S. from abroad will be paying into the tax system.  This is one small point regarding a much larger economic effect when comparing destination and origin principle taxation, which destinational has been shown to be superior for economic growth and government revenue.  Morphh  (talk) 17:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

text: With respect to immigrant laborers, I believe if they're not citizens, they won't be able to collect on the prebates.  So while you are correct in that any money they've sent home being untaxed, their other spending in this country would be taxed at a full 23/30% rate.  That would be a fairly large disincentive for them to come and work here illegally in my opinion.  Drierp (talk) 23:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foreign spending of domestically earned dollars 

message: This quote really bothers me. 
"Bill Archer, former head of the House Ways and Means Committee, asked Princeton University econometricists to survey 500 European and Asian companies regarding the impact on their business decisions if the United States enacted the FairTax. Of these companies, 400 responded that they would build their next plant in the United States while the remaining 100 companies said they would move their corporate headquarters to the United States.[24]"
The quote that it cited from says this:
"A recent survey was done, in Europe and Japan, of the major corporations and I was astounded at the results. They were asked, 'If the US abolished its income tax and went to a sales tax, would that have any impact on your decisions?' Eighty percent of the corporations said they would build their factories in the United States of America. Twenty percent said they would move their international headquarters to the United States of America!"
It doesn't mention what survey he is talking about. He could've pullen those facts out of the air for all I know. He didn't mention that the survey was done by Princeton so how did the author who wrote that know it came from Princeton? 
This article is definately not neutral and usually distorted quotes does not belong on Wikipedia. I'm removing that whole paragraph.
This article is nothing but a bunch of tripe by fair tax supporters. There's nothing academic about this article at all.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.243.210.180 (talk) 04:52, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I added another reference that supports some of the additional information presented.  At one time we had several sources for it, but we trimmed it down.  It has been stated in congress, in books, and in several web articles.  Hope this address the concern.  Morphh  (talk) 15:23, 06 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Issue with quote

message: Where are the criticisms?  There's like one blurb about the Gale study, which is then overrun with lengthy discussion of some subsequent research.  There are PLENTY of predicted effects which dispute what's currently in the article about the FairTax, and nearly none of it is in this article.  IT nearly reads like it was a copy-paste of the FairTax website's FAQ... BigK HeX (talk) 03:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of the criticism of the plan is in the primary article.  If there is a particular argument that is not present for these topic areas, please provide details as to what is missing.  There is only one blurb on Gale as his studies relate to the tax rate and distribution, not the predicted effects covered in this article.  Please provide the sources for the criticism that is missing and we can work to correct it. Morphh  (talk) 12:38, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still horribly POV  

message: What will happen to welfare programs if FairTax exists? Does the monthly payment to everyone eliminate the need for the welfare department? I'd like to see a section on this. — Timneu22 ·  talk 12:58, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think I've seen any sources on this topic point.  Certainly from a legislative perspective, the bill does nothing to change welfare laws.  Payments of the prebate are handled by the SS department, where welfare is usually a local / state mater.  Morphh  (talk) 14:58, 04 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well speaking of welfare, there are indeed a number of sources that think FairTax would create the largest welfare state in US history. It seems this type of inclusion would make the article a little more neutral. — Timneu22 ·  talk 15:58, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that form of welfare would be spending, not revenue, but I understand the point.  I have read in reliable sources where they describe the prebate system as the largest entitlement program in American history, if this is what you're talking about.  We cover this in the main article.  There is also the camp that states that this would help decrease the size of government by making the tax system transparent and removing class warfare.  It would also eliminate what many describe as corporate welfare.  So I guess there could be a few topic points to consider there. Morphh  (talk) 17:16, 04 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  In adopting the fairtax society will have determined that it does not want to tax any families poverty level spending. The rebate is society saying this is what you over payed. Shomas (talk) 17:04, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

text:  Yes, talking about largest entitlement program. Some of these POV-type issues may be worth discussing in the sub articles as well as the main article; you're less likely to be dinged on POV issues. I'm interested in the FairTax topic, and mostly support it, but the POV complainers on this talk page have serious valid points. — Timneu22 ·  talk 17:46, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It's tough to find that balance and not duplicate the argument, since presenting requires you present both sides.  Maybe a reverse summary style.  This article does need work.. it's been on the back burner since it's a sub-article.  We placed most of the criticism in the main article, so some of these offshoots were ways to reduce the content size in the main article, which in most cases downsized the proponent viewpoint.  If we have opponent content on these topics that is missing, than we should definitely include it.  Get's a little fuzzier when we're duplicating, but I'd be fine with a section on welfare if we have enough content.  Morphh  (talk) 18:47, 04 May 2010 (UTC)

text: Thinking out loud... One thing we'd have to determine is how it is a predicted effect, rather than just a statement about the prebate size.  The description itself would require balance, which suggests such tax base adjustments, tax refunds, tax grants are entitlements or welfare.  It would imply that the large entitlement program is a new or additional cost above the current tax system, making the government larger, but being revenue neutral, it wouldn't.  So I this would need some explanation. Morphh  (talk) 19:16, 04 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Welfare 

message: I'm surprised nobody has commented on the effects of the FairTax on tourism. Essentially it would provide a huge reduction in motivation for foreign people to visit the US, where they would have to pay the FairTax from money that they already suffered income tax on at home. Meanwhile, Americans would have increased spending power abroad. Stifle (talk) 11:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't seen any sources on that topic point.  The change in prices will depend on the accommodation model.  It's possible that no change in prices would occur after the tax is applied if employees don't receive the windfall of gross pay.  In that case, there would be no impact.  Since Europeans are the biggest tourism to the U.S., it may also be relevant that they pay a sales tax at home (VAT) on top of their income taxes.  So it wouldn't be much different from what they are accustom to seeing.  It's possible other aspects may offset potential losses, such as international business relocating to take advantage of no corporate income taxes.  However, to the point, if prices did increase, than it makes sense that it would decrease certain tourism.  If you find something on it, post a link. Morphh  (talk) 15:05, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

text: The question weather the fairtax effects tourism is dependent on purchasing power. If in eliminating production taxes and replacing that revenue with a consumption tax prices remain the same, then you would expect little effect on tourism, but tourist would be able to file an export claim and recover taxes payed, which effectively increases purchasing power and should attract more tourist. Shomas (talk) 17:15, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tourism 

message: This article is absolutely absurd in its POV.  It is essentially an advertisement, indistinguishable from any white paper put out by Heritage or AEI. There is ample criticism out there outside of a few head-fakes in the direction of objectivity included here.  If it is not flagged by Wiki as in violation, then Wiki has no business being in business. Quigonpaj (talk) 12:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Substituted at 03:21, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Predicted effects of the FairTax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101127050245/http://www.treasury.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml to http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:11, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Predicted effects of the FairTax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fairtax.org/pdfs/Why_retailers.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/3530/1/454
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060409130443/http://bonds.yahoo.com/sm_bd5.html to http://bonds.yahoo.com/sm_bd5.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/stories/2007/07/27/taxes0727.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bearstearns.com/bscportal/pdfs/underground.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:24, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Predicted effects of the FairTax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060614173135/http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/WSJ%20Op%20Ed%203-7-05.pdf to http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/WSJ%20Op%20Ed%203-7-05.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061015083330/http://fairtax.org/PDF/Open_Letter.pdf to http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/Open_Letter.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071110010854/http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=31824 to http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=31824
*Added  tag to http://www.webcastgroup.com/client/start.asp?wid=0840929073673
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061015083330/http://fairtax.org/PDF/Open_Letter.pdf to http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/Open_Letter.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140307011817/http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/Excerpts_from_response_to_tax_panel-103006.pdf to http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/Excerpts_from_response_to_tax_panel-103006.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061108065724/http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/MacroeconomicAnalysisofFairTax.pdf to http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/MacroeconomicAnalysisofFairTax.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070614190647/http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/Comparing%20Average%20and%20Marginal%20Tax%20Rates%2010-17-06.pdf to http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/Comparing%20Average%20and%20Marginal%20Tax%20Rates%2010-17-06.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090219031947/http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/Simulating%20the%20Dynamic%20Macroeconomic%2C%20October%204%2C%202006.pdf to http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/Simulating%20the%20Dynamic%20Macroeconomic%2C%20October%204%2C%202006.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060614173135/http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/WSJ%20Op%20Ed%203-7-05.pdf to http://people.bu.edu/kotlikoff/WSJ%20Op%20Ed%203-7-05.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:39, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified