Fair Tax Fandango (Part 1)
One of the fascinating things about right wing talk radio (and perhaps left wing talk radio as well) is how the hosts of these shows have so much “Personal Confidence”, by which I mean “Chutzpah”. These shows are designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator. On many of these shows the host will demagogue the concept of Rugged Individualism to their audience. What it seems to come down to is that to be a Rugged Individualist one must see the world as the host does. Does this not subvert the very concept of individualism? I recall in the sixties when my generation eschewed (although we had no clue as to what eschewing was) collegiate attire and we all donned T shirts and jeans just so we could be different. What we were, ultimately, was a ragged army impressed into service by jeans salesmen. Live and Learn. That’s what I have attempted to do for much of my life and I feel, for the most part, I have succeeded more often than failed. Which brings me to the point of today’s missive. Recently, I was challenged by someone who did not appreciate my berating of the so-called Fair Tax. To be brief, whenever I hear of anything claiming to be Fair, I have to ask myself, what do you mean by fair and fair to whom? It just seems such a subjective label. I have a natural antipathy towards anything that demands to be accepted as true while simultaneously denying another’s input. So Fair Tax is right up there with The Greatest Show On Earth. (You do get the humor in this metaphor, right?) The most curious part of the Fair Tax argument that began on this blog was when I said I would read the book and then comment. All of a sudden, debate, much less insight, was no longer desired. I was told I am “close minded” and will not approach the topic fairly. Having spent my entire adult life in research and development, believe me, you can not investigate anything and not be fair. Tends to skew the results which could lead to much more disastrous outcomes. The fact that I distrust Mr. Boortz does not mean I can not study the proposal and it does not mean that even a self important person (i.e. flaming egotist) as himself might not stumble upon a good idea. There may be something in the book that could be used but nothing I have read about it anywhere else leads me to believe that this idea is the one we want to wed. Be that as it may, I will be contributing my interpretation, which in America, is just as sound as anyone else’s idea until proven completely ludicrous, like giving Howie Mandel his own game show.So, at the risk of being long winded (yeah, I know, “Too Late!”) let’s get started. I will be posting this in several entries do to length and in respect to the varied time frames of a diverse number of attention spans. The Hook In the Introduction, the set up claims it will begin with a history lesson of how we got to where we are with the tax code as it is. From there, explain how the government tricks us about how much we actually pay in taxes (first con) then on to reasons why taxes are as high as they are. The reason I call this the first con is that the government does not “trick” us about the taxes we pay. They are very up front and belligerent about it. The biggie, explaining the Fair Tax in detail and how it is “fair”. Again, gentle readers (to quote Miss Manners) beware of wolves dressed as sheep when they attempt to usurp “fair”. Arguably, the authors do sound like they really believe all they are writing but they also claim that while some objections are valid they will concentrate on “dissecting their arguments to expose misunderstandings, outright distortions and whatever grains of truth there might be”. Nothing like attempting to pre-empt any of your potential for free thought. This is a common carnival trick used by con artists in circuses of the mind everywhere. There is more but I am really only trying to hit the high points. The authors are also convinced that we, the commoners, are not capable of thinking for ourselves and will do their utmost to lift that heavy burden from our minds. The dissertation I am beginning would be remiss if I did not explain the Libertarian mind set. This will be in the next part. To Be Continued….
Let me tell you how it will be, Related: lilyslore's blog | login or register to post comments | printer friendly version | Tags: circus of the mind | Fair tax | libertarian | SCAM
Submitted by Foxx on Mon, 04/07/2008 - 1:57pm.
This is so exciting, i might have to go and get the book so i can think for myself, ha. Although, the fair tax org webpage has all the information needed to describe the fair tax and how it won't work and how it'll never be debated on the house or senate floor, sorry, this is where i part from my right wing conservative friends, the fair tax is just as full of propaganda and hillarious thoughts as global warming. Can't wait for part two and three and four and................
Submitted by lilyslore on Mon, 04/07/2008 - 7:35pm.
Truthy, in the words of one of our best orators, "Well, there you go again." I am not doing any of the things you allude to. Several people indicated in the blog that they would be interested in my review of the book primarily because they did NOT want to read it but trusted me enough to give them a summation which is what I am doing. If you take the time and a reading comprehension refresher, you will see that is what I am doing. My interpretations are thrown in gratis. I'm just a generous soul that way. ;>) As to being rude regarding Mr. Boortz, that weasel wrote the book on rudeness. He is not a very nice person. There is no bias here. merely recognition. Anytime you disgaree with him you are considered beneath contempt. I have heard his program. And keep in mind, I have been and remain a lifelong conservative. Boortz is an embarrassment to the cause. It's no wonder so many people who do not research conservatism as a philosophy are reluctant to do so when it is misappropriated by a Boortz. I have also noted in my first post that readers should go and investigate this on their own. Nothing substitutes for one on one research. If you weren't so close minded, you would see this. Merely mentioning that I perceive the authors as con men does not necessarily make it so but that is how they present themselves to me. Anyone is free and propmpted to add their thoughts pro or con. If you reread what I posted as to the "first con" you would see that it is followed by why I call it the first con. I realize you are not trying to lie about my post but simply zipping through it and making knee jerk reactive replies is as unfair to me as to any of your other readers. I am honestly taking the time here to build my case by doing the reading. The posts are primarily, for me, entertainment but they are also based on the reality of the book in question. But it is so like close minded people such as yourself which may well be why the bill has languished in Congress as long as it has. They may not be shooting the messenger but the messenger is not endearing himself to anyone with such a haughty air about him. Take a hint! Lily's Lore "I don't ever want to be rescued And I don't ever want to be saved I got a feelin' that I'm gonna be alive forever Dancin' on the edge of a grave..." Jim Steinman
Submitted by TruthHurts on Mon, 04/07/2008 - 7:39pm.
I guess she didn't like the book. I must agree with Mrs. lilylore on one of her statements. "whenever I hear of anything claiming to be Fair, I have to ask myself, what do you mean by fair and fair to whom?" I find this to be interesting because based on all of the negative pre- judgement and rude name calling in regard to one of the authors of the book Mr. Boortz by Ms. Lilylore, before even reading the book, that now Ms. lilylore would have us all beleive she will read the book for us, and in a fair unbiased way tell us what we should think about the subject. I like my way better. I beleive individuals should read the book for themselves and come to their own conclusions. Unlike lilylore I think you are all smart enough to understand the context of the book and perfectly capable of forming your own opinions. Ms. lilylore is doing excactly what she claims the authors of the book are doing when in her own words she states "The authors are also convinced that we, the commoners, are not capable of thinking for ourselves and will do their utmost to lift that heavy burden from our minds." Yet Ms. lilyore assumes we can't read and understand the book so she will help us out. When Ms. lilylore quotes the book. "how the government tricks us about how much we actually pay in taxes (first con) then on to reasons why taxes are as high as they are. The reason I call this the first con is that the government does not “trick” us about the taxes we pay. They are very up front and belligerent about it." Here Ms. Lilylore explains it's the "first con", but makes not effort to explain what the authors mean by this, her only input here is her negetive opinion. There will be no fairness here, and I strongly recommned anyone really interested in the topic to investigate themselves, and form their own opinions. There are no two sides to this story just lilylore's veiw. I understand many people will not agree, and many will. Thats ok. Thats just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Submitted by TruthHurts on Mon, 04/07/2008 - 8:07pm.
I won't bother you, or comment on you quest again Ms. lilylore enjoy your fun TRUTHHURTS People are talking about ...Here are the recent blog postings with the most comments. |
Who's online
There are currently 0 users and 116 guests online.
Recent comments |
Lily;
I can't wait for part deux!
Mike Heemer