Just FYI if you didn't know:

Ru Paul is a male cross dresser: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ru_Paul and it's not looked upon as a good thing to call someone Ru Paul.  It would be like me calling Micheal Jordan, Michaeal Jackson because the name is similar.  Many people consider Ru Paul to be a nut case.

Back on topic!!  Bring out the opponents! 

haven't spend much time reading it, but it sounds like the exact opposite of what economists would recommend--up income taxes, lower sales tax. as proposed under the fairtax the poor certainly are the biggest losers.

 I think you have it backwards.  It's for the removal of an income tax.

Simple: Large amount of income =/= being rich =/= paying more tax.

1. People who are rich and save their money (to make more money with) aren't spending it. So that ties up a good deal of the "potential" tax.

2. Just because you have a large income does not necessarily mean you live the wonderful life. 100,000 in NYC doesn't go nearly as far as it does in Denver, Colorado. The expense difference causes those people in higher cost of living states to pay a larger portion of the taxes. Is that "fair"?

3. Large Families may have a large income and a huge expense bill. Is it fair to make them pay more tax when their overall standard of living may be lower? By the way, poor people are more likely to have large families than rich.

And that's just off the top, without even digging into this. I'm sure there's some standard response to all of those, so go ahead and post them and let's see where this goes. By the way, I'm heading out, so don't expect a response from me anytime soon. And I'm not opposed to the fair tax. I'm posting what I consider my first concerns the concept.

If you don't know "Rupaul" i'd say you were either too young or too disconected from society to be debating tax law.

Also the FairTax completely untaxes the poor. They get a monthly prebate based on the number of people in the household. The prebate is a pre-refund of taxes collected up to the poverty level. A single person would get about $192. A Married couple would get double that. Children are also counted in the amount received in the Prebate. So the Poor would not be taxed at all under the FairTax.

oh, and 4) It isn't the amount of money you make that matters, it's the amount of money you spend. So it's people who spend a larger percentage of their income that would pay the most tax. And as I see it, poor people are more likely to spend a larger portion of their income than rich. Maybe the "prebate" offsets that. Haven't looked into it. But any program where the govt. sends you money can't be good. It should be some kind of discount coupon instead to avoid having to pay taxes in the first place.

@Kasz216

I didn't remember about Ru Paul at the moment of the post. I also had just read that "nickname" on a different site without any context of it being derogatory. So my apologies. Just test me here and see if i am "too young or too disconnected from society to be debating tax law."

The Prebate would most easily work if it was outsourced to a private company. It could be a "checking account" with a monthly deposit from the government through the sponsoring company/bank. Then the people could use the money as they see fit.

What a coincedence.

Anyway, while it doesn't seem like a "bad" idea, it kinda seems like the same concept as what we have now with the graduated tax brackets, except it cuts out the middle man. We still have an "income tax", because of the theory of those who make more will pay more for goods/services, it's just called something different.

As long as the percentages are close to what they are now, I'm indifferent to it.

Let's see, sales tax in my area = 8.25%, if we have a "fair tax", and it's around 23%, that's a 14.75% difference. That about what's been getting taken out of my paycheck every two weeks, so I really don't see the advantage or disadvantage to it.