Posted by
Andrews on Monday, May 12, 2008 2:31:51 PM
I was reading
Mike Adams' column on the FairTax when it struck me that he is falling into the same error as all FairTax supporters, the ability to find the mote in their neighbors' eyes while missing quite a few beams in their own.
Just two examples will suffice.
First, the claim that the FairTax will somehow "eliminate the IRS". It may remove the bureaucracy known as the IRS, but it will have to include a bureaucracy every bit as big.
As I mentioned a long time ago, there are countless ways people could easily defraud the FairTax collectors, leading to the need for a massive investigatory body. And, even if we ignore that, just administering the receipts collected, as well as the huge prebate system would require a bureaucracy that would dwarf today's IRS. I just don't see how they believe that this system would work without any administrative apparatus.
And PLEASE don't tell me "read the book". I know I promised to respond to every comment, but I will purposely ignore anyone who uses those words in replying to this article. Either make an argument or remain silent, but please don't tell me some mystic book will persuade me. This is not Scientology.
The second error is even more amusing, as it is just so consciously blind. In his description with a conversation with a flat tax advocate he raises the possibility of the government modifying the flat tax. Yet, somehow, Dr. Adams does nor see that the FairTax could be subject to every bit of the same manipulation. Items could be excluded, others taxed higher, the prebate could become another welfare in disguise like the EITC, there are hundreds of ways the FairTax could be manipulated.
Some will reply, but the law doesn't allow that. To which I reply, the flat tax proposals don't allow manipulation either. And neither one will matter once politicians decide to change the law.
And that is the real problem. The FairTax advocates tend to argue thus: Assuming everything I say about the FairTax is true, and assuming it is enacted exactly as I wish, it will be much better than your system. But, when I say your system, I mean your system as it would actually be implemented, including the possibility of manipulation by politicians.
In other words, they are comparing a fantasy to reality, and fantasy is winning. That doesn't really tell me much.
-----------------------------------------
For a recap of my take on the FairTax,
this article contains a list of almost all of my past posts on the subject. And, yes, I just realized I never did post my response to the FairTax.org reply. Afraid I got distracted and simply forgot, mainly as I thought the FairTax was a dead issue. Guess I have to revisit that response now that the FairTax is rearing its head once again.