Sen. Mike Gravel Announces Run for President, wants National Sales Tax

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

The National Sales Tax, now pimped as "The Fair Tax" by its author, John Linder (R-GA), and his mouthpiece, right-wing talk show host Neal Boortz. If Sen. Mike Gravel wants this, my response is "FUCK Sen. Mike Gravel"...

"You know, I'm not exactly sure how big the national sales tax is going to have to be, but it's the kind of interesting idea that we ought to explore seriously," Bush said, according to a Reuters report.

National Retail Federation speaks out against The National Sales tax and consumption taxes in general



Sen. Mike Gravel Announces Run for President

4/17/2006 9:25:00 AM

To: National Desk, Political Reporter

Contact: Elliott Jacobson, 202-460-8340 (cellular); or 202-558-6394 (office)

WASHINGTON, April 17 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Former U.S. Sen. Mike Gravel dramatically challenged America's dishonored and inert political and governmental leadership while announcing today that he is a candidate for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.

The senator said, "Our country needs renewal -- not just of particular policies or of people, but of democracy itself. I believe the remedy for the state of our political alienation is the civic renewal embodied in the 'National Initiative for Democracy.'" Promising to enact the National Initiative, Sen. Gravel said, "The National Initiative will bring all American citizens into the operations of government as lawmakers."

Forcefully pointing out that "Our three branches of government have become like an unstable chair with only three legs," the senator said, "Giving us -- American citizens -- legislative power will put the fourth leg on our chair, giving birth to a new foundation of American governance."

Offering a dramatic program of national rebirth and punctuating each proposal with the clarion call of his campaign "Let the People Decide," Sen. Gravel said he would place before the American people his agenda that includes:

The Fair Tax: Describing the current tax system as one whose "unfairness is only superceded by its incomprehensibility" the senator promised to place before the people "a straightforward national sales tax with proper consideration for the necessities of life through a pre-bate."

Social Security: The senator proposed to place before the people his plan to put real money in the Social Security Trust Fund, investing it properly and identifying the interests of individual beneficiaries so they can leave their surplus funds to their heirs.

Foreign Policy: Pledging to pursue aggressive diplomacy and not war, the senator said, "I will remove our troops from Iraq expeditiously and without contingency, President Bush's mistake is not worth the life or maiming of one more American soldier."

The senator promised to place before the people an amendment to the Constitution, removing the power to declare war from Congress who, in any case, has abdicated their responsibility to the President, and making it the responsibility of the people.

Declaring it his "Unreserved faith and trust in the common sense and wisdom of the American people," the senator echoed his determination to "Let the People Decide."

http://www.usnewswire.com/

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=64065

[Connie_Corleone]

1. President Gravel. Has a ring to it. LOL.

[WI_DEM]

2. Don't worry he won't get anywhere

If we're going to nominate someone who is pushing 80 why not Jimmy Carter?

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

4. I'm more disturbed about a Dem pushing the N.S.T...

...and worse, he's being extremely deceptive about the "prebates." In Linder's plan, the prebates are for "poverty-level" families ($18,000 per year and under).

I've got to tell you...if a Democrat...ANY Democrat...runs on a platform calling for a National Sales Tax, we might as well elect another Republican. What would we gain? Bush's OWN PANEL said "this is a bad idea," and the idea refuses to die. It kills me to see it being pimped by OUR OWN PARTY.

[papau]

3. Will the media note all the studies that show sales tax must exceed 55%

Indeed - they are so afraid of the high rate that Linder had to invent a new definition of sales tax rate.

If you pay a 55% tax on a $100 item, there by paying $155 for the item, Linder would like you to refer to the tax rate as

55/155 = 35%.

I bet the media will let him get away with both "not knowing the rate" and with claiming the rate will "not be much over 30%".

I love my informative media.

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

7. Over 55% PLUS existing state taxes...

...so where I live, in California, that means 55% plus 8.25% for a total of 63.25% taxed on EVERY dollar. Medical visits would be taxed. Food would be taxed. RENT would be taxed...all at this rate.

And the question that NO ONE has answered is the double-dip aspect...if you have money in the bank that you EARNED and paid taxes on WHEN YOU EARNED it, if you spent it RIGHT NOW you'd pay your state sales tax. Under the N.S.T., the government gets an additional 55% bite on money that has ALREADY BEEN TAXED.

But...as I said...my primary concern here is that a Democrat is pushing this as a good thing.

:grr:

[Clark2008]

13. Food is already taxed in Tennessee, where we don't

have a state income tax.

Sad, isn't it?

[rocktivity]

16. This sounds like a job for DU-er Andy Happy!

After that wonderful video he did about Bush's social security plan, doing one about why a national sales or flat income tax is a bad idea would be a walk in the park!

:headbang:
rocknation

[papau]

25. Great idea! :-)

:-)

[Freddie Stubbs]

28. I don't think that the media will cover much about this guy

[Finder]

5. I support a national sales tax...

but would have to see the specific plans submitted.

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

8. It's all over the Web. Google it.

Then once you know the details, tell me how much you support it.

Here are a couple to get you started.

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_bartlett/bartlett200408090847.asp

http://www.nrf.com/content/default.asp?folder=press/release2005&file=nrst-rejected.htm&bhfv=2&bhqs=1

[Finder]

33. That is the repub plan, not necessarily the only one. n/t

[Greeby]

6. Its not a matter of whether he wants it

His whole theme is based on the people voting on these issues

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

10. If people vote on the lie versus the facts, that's the issue here.

It's also the fact that the truth of John Linder's "National Sales Tax / Fair Tax" proposal is available to anyone who wants to hunt it down on the Web, and we STILL get the lies.

Nancy Pelosi spoke out against this:

Pelosi: ‘National Sales Tax Would be Burden for Middle Class Americans, But Boon for the Wealthy’

So I would hope that the Democratic Party WOULD NOT SUPPORT ANY CANDIDATE who attempted to fly this flag. It's dangerous, it holds so much potential for destruction.

You're right, people would have to vote for it. Adam voted to eat the apple Eve handed him, you know what I'm saying?

[Finder]

12. The rich would never go for this...

since it is more of a consumption based tax than an income tax.

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

14. Of course the rich would go for this. It's designed for the rich.

It's based on taxing what you spend. The rich have far more money after they "consume" than the working class. That means they can take their untaxed income and invest it and generate more income.

Please, do yourself a favor. Do some research on this and see if you feel the same way about it that you do right now. You're responding to the way the proposal has been sold to the public so far...not the actual proposal itself.

[Finder]

18. I am doing a paper on it.

There is a pilot program going on now that I am part of.

[Telly Savalas]

21. But it's Econ 101 that the marginal propensity to consume

goes down as income goes up.

[Finder]

24. That is not Econ 101...

This is Econ 101--the more money you have, the more you spend.

[CTLawGuy]

37. ever heard of diminishing returns?

the more you have of something the less the marginal value of each extra unit. Broadly, that means the wealthier you are, the lower a percentage of your income you will spend on buying stuff. You only WANT so much stuff.

You can only eat so many ice cream cones, or see so many movies before you get sick of them. Eat a lot of pizza you get sick of it.

The rich invest their money so it makes more money. The savings from the abolition of the income tax will more likely go to extra investment for them rather than for middle class people who pay considerably less in income tax.

[Finder]

38. The rich will always have more money...

the focus should be on helping the lower incomes be able to survive.

The taxes paid on large purchases like property, cars, thousand dollar dresses will more than make up for any shortfalls.

Of course, like state tax today, there will be a rate schedule according to the type of goods purchased.

[CTLawGuy]

39. how do you know that

the ultra rich make up a tiny percent of the population, and their taxes paid on dresses wouldnt' necessarily cover the loss.

[mac56]

30. You're doing a paper on it?

Consider these points:

We'll most likely end up with both a national sales tax and an income tax. Even if legislation requires abolition of the income tax, some “national crisis” (e.g., war on terror) will soon cause the income tax to be reinstated. And of course, bureaucracies and bureaucrats never simply disappear. Income tax enforcers would get new life as fair tax enforcers.

The rate of the fair tax would be colossal. Its proponents admit they'll need a 23 percent tax rate to fund the current size of the federal government. However, the Brookings Institute calculates that to pay all current government expenditures while also compensating for such factors as tax evasion, the national sales tax might have to run as high as 67 percent.

Inflation will kill you. As goods become more expensive, you'll pay more in taxes or do without the things you need. As your food, clothing, vehicles, and medical care get more and more expensive, you'll pay more and more and more sales tax.

The fair tax is unfair to retirees. People who have paid 1/4 or 1/3 of their income in taxes for 40 years will now have to pay an equally high tax on all the after tax income they've managed to put aside for their retirement. Every time retirees buy anything with their lifelong savings, they'll be double taxed.

The fair tax will require a tracking of your entire financial life. How else will the government know if you're being taxed fairly? They'll then decree that it has a vital interest in knowing exactly who is buying too much unhealthy food, the “wrong” kinds or amounts of medicine, ammunition, or unapproved reading matter. Your purchases could lead to criminal investigations, denial of insurance, suspension of your drivers license, and other bureaucratic punishments.

A fair tax will create a huge black market. If people can evade a 30+ percent tax, they will. Such down home places as swap meets, farmers' markets, and garage sales will automatically become prime places for black market activity. Either the tax will eventually be extended to used items, or all such markets will be heavily regulated. And while some people keep more of their money through black-market purchases, those who play by the rules will end up paying higher taxes.

The fair tax is regressive: the poorer you are the more you pay, proportional to your income. Sponsors of the new tax have come up with the worst possible solution for making it more “fair.” Instead of just not taxing essential items like food, health care, transportation, or clothing, they want the federal government to cut each of us a reimbursement check every month. Think of the bureaucracy! Think of the government dependence this will create!

Many industries may collapse. Just before the fair tax goes into effect, many Americans will fear that retail prices will all go up 30+ pervent to adjust for the new tax. So they'll go out in a buying frenzy. The economy will boom as Americans race out to buy cars, electronic gear, or stock up on food. Then sales will plummet. Some industries producing high-ticket items might never recover.

New homes will suddenly become 30 percent more expensive than existing ones because all new construction will be subject to the tax. Two homes could sit side-by-side – each with four bedrooms, two baths, and comparable features – and one would cost $50,000 or $100,000 more than the other, simply because it was being marketed by its builder, rather than a resident. No one would want new homes.

You'll have to have a receipt to prove you bought that can of beans, that computer, or that car “legally.” Lose your receipt and you could be required to pay that 30+ percent tax all over again – plus penalties and interest.

As it gets closer to being law, you can bet that it will get more and more complicated. What do you mean the tax is the same for bibles as it is for pornography? Are you saying that someone buying good, wholesome Iowa corn has to pay the same tax as someone who buys French wine? A poor family pays the same sales tax on baby food that a rich bachelor spends on his sports car? Voila: a thousand pages of regulations describing which custom sales tax rates apply to which items.

[papau]

26. Consumption tax means no tax on 90% of rich's earnings - INVESTMENT INCOME

is not taxed.

The final shift of taxes currently on the rich onto the backs of the middleclass.

Great idea.

And the luxury tax of the 90's proved how easily the rich hid major purchases.

I am surprised Mike G did not speak to someone - as in a fellow Democrat or progressive or liberal - before saying he was for this

[Finder]

34. Are all Dems, Progressives and Liberals pro-income tax?

The current tax code sucks and is not fair.

[papau]

40. of the bad tax choices, the income tax is the best for the non-rich

what part of the tax code sucks?

The Trillions hidden by the rich via the one page that is Section 482?

Or the slight shift in tax burden to singles so that society can encourage marriage and children?

Or the massive shift in tax (via higher than otherwise needed tax rates) to the middle class singles and married from the rich via the not treating an investment dollar of income the same as a wage dollar of income (the investment dollar is nearly excluded these days as Bush pushes toward total exclusion of investment dollars and a resulting "consumption tax").

Perhaps the other income taxe's wage cap (the payroll tax only taxes up to the first 90,000 of wages in 2005, and does not tax investment income) resulting in a much higher tax rate than would be needed if no wage cap and inclusion of investment income with the rich getting large Soc Sec payments - but payments based on the current SS final tier 15% Benefit calculation factor being applied to their income over 90,000 in order to calculate their benefit (the reduction is 25% to 50% of the current tax, depending on inclusion or exclusion of investment income in the income to be taxed, assuming something like the first 100,000 of investment income would be free of any "payroll" tax)

[Finder]

23. Firstly, that plan in question is not necessarily the same one...

and secondly, I disagree with Pelosi on a couple of points.

1)I do not think because a citizen is married or has children they should get tax breaks. IMO, it punishes those who choose not to marry or have children.

2)Second, why should being able to afford your own house be rewarded by tax breaks? Mortgages are smaller than rents in many cases which is another way of punishing those who are in the lower income brackets.

[Finder]

11. He seems to be proposing direct democracy...

or something closer to it than we have now. Would be interesting.

[Ignacio Upton]

9. Well there goes the possibility of me voting for him

at least in the primaries. I'm dead set against eliminating progressive taxation and replacing it with this giveaway. As for Gravel's candidacy and how he does in the primaries, he will either end up like Jerry Brown or Carol Mosley-Braun. He's also 74, and is even older than Reagan was when he ran for his SECOND term in 1984.

[Oversea Visitor]

15. Where did he come from?

What did he do?
How come I never notice him?

Guess he hide well.

[Finder]

17. He helped bring Nixon down...

re: Pentagon Papers.

[Oversea Visitor]

19. I never heard of him

Ah maybe a compromise deal for a quickie replacement of CHIMP :)

[Finder]

20. Here are some links...

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/02/1445247

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Gravel

http://politics1.com/p2008-gravel.htm

http://demofound.us/

[sendero]

22. Good luck..

... but there is no way a National Sales Tax is a good idea, prebate or no prebate.

There are any number of good ways to revamp our tax system. This isn't one of them.

[dtotire]

29. Consumption Tax

I would not object to a consumption tax whether it be a sales tax or a value added tax IF , and only IF it the revenue was directed to a specific social program, such as universal medical care, or a sound pension program. I would object if the revenue was used to pay for defense, or interest on the National Debt. This should be paid by income taxes on the wealthy. By relieving business of the burden of providing health care and pensions they would become more competitive with foreign businesses.

[Finder]

35. I believe this would be a replacement for the Fed Income Tax...

not in addition to it.

[Clarkie1]

27. The guy is nuts.

"The senator promised to place before the people an amendment to the Constitution, removing the power to declare war from Congress who, in any case, has abdicated their responsibility to the President, and making it the responsibility of the people."

That is really irresponsible and unworkable. Congress needs to do their job, that's what they are there for and it's our job to hold congress accountable.

[Finder]

36. I think that was his point...

they didn't do their job.

[many a good man]

31. He singlehandedly stopped the Vietnam draft by filibustering

In 1971, the same year that he placed more than 4000 pages of the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional record, he embarked on a one-man filibuster against a bill renewing the draft. Using various parliamentary methods, Gravel was able to block the bill for five months before President Richard Nixon and Senate Republicans agreed to allow the draft to expire in 1973.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Gravel

[Finder]

32. but..but..he wants a national sales tax...

seems that is all anyone is focusing on.

And people wonder why politicians are forced to pander...