Friday, January 04, 2008
"Hello Tigerhawk-World" and the Fair Tax
If you don't know who I am, here's a bio, complete with references to my old-old site which actually had a certain amount of notoriety back in the immediate post-9/11 days.
I'm toying with a new pseudonym - I'm sick of Dreck. I've always wanted to be Anthony Blanche:
Waugh juxtaposes the clean, sterile ‘charm’ of England against Anthony’s vibrant degeneracy, his ambiguity, his ruthless and joyful self-expression. He is a queen, a crossbreed, a parvenu, a commentator and a product of flamboyant self-invention.
On the other hand, I'm a married, "sensible shoes" libertarian, as Stephen Green once said, and Anthony wouldn't be caught dead in "those d-d-d-dreadful excrescences". I'll accept suggestions.
---------
I note that my old co-blogger is toying with the fair tax. She sums it up reasonably, but I would add a few more downsides:
- Massive growth in black-market goods and barter markets to avoid the built-in tax
- When is it a good time to create a consumption tax? Certainly not now.
- I'd prefer a tax that was more visible - add it on like the PST and GST in Canada. People should know what they are paying.
Still, we all know that any tax proposal will be watered down by the time it is passed (see Tyler, #2) and this one stands strongly for simplification, which is a good thing.
So hello all. I look forward to interacting with you.
10 Comments:
By 
antithaca, at
Fri Jan 04, 05:11:00 PM:
congrats on your new "spot"...look forward to reading you. it's funny, I was just discussing the fair tax and potential downsides with a friend today...wishing I knew more about them (it's not a top issue for me).
By 
, at
Fri Jan 04, 05:38:00 PM:
Is anyone familiar with section 6672 of the current tax code? It imposes a potential personal liability on any employer who fails to collect, account for, and pay over withheld income, Social Security and Medicare taxes to the government and is frequently used by the IRS to pursue unpaid payroll taxes. It is relevant to the Fair Tax because every penny of a national sales tax is a collected tax, collected by the merchant from the consumer (and you damn better believe it will be extend to services as well as good), in essence making every merchant in the U.S. a tax collector for Uncle Sam and subjecting them to the same penalties if they fail to turn over the money. Since no tax collects itself without human agency, and some level of noncompliance can be anticipated regardless of the method of taxation, that will result under the Fair Tax regime in a federal collection bureaucracy that will dwarf the current IRS in its size and scope of enforcement. The Fair Tax advocates are the biggest pack of snake oil salesman to come down the pike in many a moon. There is an argument to be made for a consumption based tax but the Fair Tax is based on entirely false premises.
Zhombre
By Neil Sinhababu, at
Fri Jan 04, 06:43:00 PM:
It doesn't actually get rid of the IRS, right? As I understand, it just shifts the function of the IRS to shutting down black markets where people are trying to avoid the tax.
By Neil Sinhababu, at
Fri Jan 04, 06:46:00 PM:
Oops, that's what Zhombre said.
When I read that his comment started with "Is anyone familiar with section 6672 of the current tax code?" I didn't read any further.
By , at
Fri Jan 04, 08:09:00 PM:
Ah-ha!
Fresh meat for the grinder.
Well, Mindy -- is it okay if I call you Mindy? -- we're all friends here.
Well, Mindy, welcome aboard. Boy, are we going to have fun with you. (hauling out fine-grain whetstone) So, do you prefer the quick slash to the throat, or shall we just whittle you down, piece by little piece?
Let's go with the latter. Kind of a 'warm-up' as you prepare to face the tough, grizzled veterans who haunt this place.
Ready?
This doesn't promise to be pretty.
________________________________
"The head Tigerhawk"
You mean there are two of them?
And it's "TigerHawk", capital 'H', you moron.
No, not pretty at all!
(side question for Tiger: you did say this guy was a college graduate, right?)
"the distinguished commentariat here."
Wow, what a big word! You must be a Harvard grad!
"I'm very flattered and pleased to accept."
Uh-huh. You say that now.
"who share Paul Krugman's politics"
A god among gods.
"no matter what Andrew Sullivan says"
Who? Say, isn't that one of the sockpuppet names Glen Greenwal-, oh, screw it.
"I've always found the argument here polite and well-supported."
Bwah-hah-hah!
(picking self up off floor)
You're just saying that so we'll have to be polite and support our arguments well with you.
"WE WANT MINDY'S HEAD ON A LANCE!"
Doesn't look like it's working very well. Maybe next time.
"Comment wars at my old site"
Hey look, It's me!
Yeah, I-
Hey look, It's me!
looked it over and-
Hey look, It's me!
saw lots of places where you-
Hey look, It's me!
appeared to be quite humble and-
Hey look, It's me!
modest.
Hey look, It's me!
Kind of.
"and my erstwhile co-blogger"
Ah, yes, Jane. Why, here's some her insightful, incisive blogging now!
"At brunch on Wednesday with a bunch of bloggers, there was a longish discussion of my white jeans, and whether white jeans only look good on tall, skinny people. This segued into a conversation about why designers only design clothes that look good on tall, skinny people."
Because nobody likes fat people, Jane.
Jeez, Mindy, I thought everybody knew that. The only reason we put up with ol' "TubbyHawk" is cuz he does that "nuance" stuff so well.
"I'm sick of Dreck."
Well, take comfort that you're not alone. By definition alone, most people get sick of dreck.
Perhaps your blogsite members most of all.
(thu-dump!)
"I'm a married-"
Loser. And you admit it. You must be a... a... a...
"libertarian"
Yeah, sure. You didn't even capitalize the damn thing -- how serious can you be? Boy, if I had a nickel for every loser who didn't feel like a 'Pub or a Dem and so called themselves a "Libertarian"...
"is toying with the fair tax."
Loser. Can you honestly see this country changing its entire tax system? Christ, it'd cost a trillion dollars just to convert everything over, the delays and confusion would go on for years, there'd be scams and workarounds and loopholes that aren't even dreamed of today, and for what?
So we have a "better" system? You mean a better way of being fleeced?
There's simply too much momentum behind the old system, and it works -- however clunkily. The people will never become enthusiastic over the Fair Tax idea, simply because it's not the kind of thing people really care about. And there's too much ennui in Congress for anyone there to get very excited about it.
Not trying to burst any bubbles here -- I think it's a great idea -- just big-time impractical for this day & age. Catch us again in 2017.
"but I would add a few more downsides"
Well, if you didn't, you certainly wouldn't fit the TigerHawk Co-Blogger Requirements. He's got one guy who's always claiming the financial market is on the edge of doom, and another one who was talking about civilization imploding a while back. If you, yourself, don't engage in a little fearmongering at least once a week, we're going to be very disappointed. How will we know which site we're on?
"So hello all."
There's a comma after "hello," you illiterate buffoon. Try and put some of that fancy Yale education to work, will ya??
"Hello Tigerhawk-World"
And why the hell is there a hyphen in there?? Has Yale turned into a government school?
"You mean before or after subsidies?"
Hey, I make the jokes around here, fella.
"I look forward to interacting with you."
You say that now.
So, okay, apart from your requisite weekly fearmongering, are you going to talk about boring financial crap all of the time? Did TH work out some kind of monetary remuneration plan with you if his numbers start tanking because you're boring a bunch of political junkies to death?
Does the phrase "class-action lawsuit" suddenly spring to mind, should we be disappointed with the direction the site has taken?
Do you have any pictures of hot chicks you can post?
Since you know TH personally, would it be possible for you to somehow set up a situation where you can blackmail him into hounding Googleblogs to update these goddam comment boxes so we can embed links easier?
Did you see this?
We like the big lug, despite the fact that he dissed the Disney 'princess' dresses, for which he will never be forgiven. I hate curmudgeons even more than economists. :)
Anyway, nice to have you here, Mindy.
My guess?
You'll be changing that handle of yours real soon now.
Best regards (and probably the last time you'll get them),
Doc
By Country Squire, at
Fri Jan 04, 09:27:00 PM:
Jesus Doc! Don't sugar coat it - tell the man how you really feel.
Welcome aboard MHD and good luck.
By Escort81, at
Sat Jan 05, 01:24:00 AM:
What a welcome by the Doc!
Mindles, if you want to change your name to Anthony Blanche, I think that's great. I have read all of Waugh, and while he was not a particularly great guy to hang out with, he's one of the outstanding literary stylists of the last century, and Blanche is one of his best minor characters. The adaptation of Brideshead Revisited for TV is probably the best single TV adaptation (in terms of being true to the book) of a novel ever produced -- many hours of final product for a relatively short novel.
Let's deal with the problems presented by the AMT and the sunset of the phase out of the Estate Tax / Death Tax in 2010/2011 before we get all philosophical about a Fair Tax. No one is ever going to start a tax system from scratch!
Welcome aboard, even if you are a Yalie.
By Andrew Hofer, at
Sat Jan 05, 10:52:00 AM:
Nice parody, mercy, but a true believer would call Krugman a God among gods.
By , at
Sat Jan 05, 11:29:00 AM:
"Nice parody, mercy, but a true believer would call Krugman a God among gods."
Damn, hoisted on my own petard. I'm not really sure what a petard is, but I feel somethin' sharp back there, so I'm guessin' it's one of those petard things!
Thanks for taking my 'welcome' so well. After that, it'll be pretty much smooth sailing from here on out. When someone calls you a "dirty neocon warmongering baby-killer", you'll just harken back to ol' Doc's welcome note and think, "Well, hell -- that wasn't so bad!"
Perspective is everything.
I was, however, a little disappointed with your response. I was hoping you'd say something like, "Who are you, Doc? Why are you hounding me when I've just started? Who ARE you?"
So I could answer with this.
Maybe next time. :)
By , at
Sat Jan 05, 01:23:00 PM:
As to your prediction that a fair tax would create a black market in untaxed goods, I don't think that's really all that likely of an outcome. It's not all that clear to me that it would be easier to bypass a consumption tax than it is to bypass our current tax system. For a large fraction of the working population, the income tax is essentially an honor system. Anyone who relies on tips or runs their own business has the ability to cheat on their taxes pretty much with impunity. And everyone can take shady deductions or engage in any number of other tax dodges. Given all these opportunities for cheating, economists have been wondering for a while why Americans are as honest about taxes as they are. Maybe that would all change with a consumption tax, but it's hard to see why it should. Besides, a consumption tax would eliminate the possibility of people going without paying any taxes. While you might go to the effort of turning to a black market when you're buying something expensive, it's unlikely that anyone will buy everything through the underground.
