tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post2553364976626419822..comments2024-03-19T07:48:54.021-06:00Comments on Gus Van Horn: Around the Web on 8-28-07Gus Van Hornhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-81047145328630477152007-08-31T22:10:00.000-06:002007-08-31T22:10:00.000-06:00Not surprising, but thank you for the comment and ...Not surprising, but thank you for the comment and pointing me to the article.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-72591925831344525322007-08-31T21:46:00.000-06:002007-08-31T21:46:00.000-06:00Goldwater was far from being a racist. He opposed ...Goldwater was far from being a racist. He opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 because he considered it a usurpation of states' rights by the federal government. He preferred desegregation to happen locally without government involvement. The documentary indicated that he, as a Phoenix City Council member, tirelessly lobbied local businesses and showed them how segregation was inimical to their interests and freedom.<BR/><BR/>This <A HREF="http://www.reason.com/news/show/28337.html" REL="nofollow">review of a Goldwater biography</A> has some choice quotes from Goldwater on the subject.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-85236145466054816522007-08-28T19:55:00.000-06:002007-08-28T19:55:00.000-06:00Thanks for the high compliment.I am looking forwar...Thanks for the high compliment.<BR/><BR/>I am looking forward to seeing more of your stuff.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-57603503827506871592007-08-28T19:46:00.000-06:002007-08-28T19:46:00.000-06:00Gus,Thanks for your mention of my post on Carol's ...Gus,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your mention of my post on Carol's Place. <BR/><BR/>By the way, I'm starting to blog on a more regular basis, which for me means a couple of days (or more) a week. So please stop by more often. I've stopped subscribing to TIA Daily (which is becoming more and more of a misnomer), so you're blog, the most consistent of the Objectivists sites I check out daily, is my new TIA Daily.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the insights. <BR/><BR/>JKJoseph Kellardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05792444138935346026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-47724450136235388242007-08-28T13:21:00.000-06:002007-08-28T13:21:00.000-06:00That would be good, but the way its proponents are...That <I>would</I> be good, but the way its proponents are selling it, it's like they're hoping to pull a fast one, to trick people into thinking it'll be cheap.<BR/><BR/>And when they get caught -- which is what Bartlett doubtless saw himself doing -- they'll look bad and, like the Flat Tax, it won't get passed anyway.<BR/><BR/>On balance, if this passed, it could be a good thing, but it will almost be by accident. And it will have to win electoral support from a public that doesn't grasp how expensive all their "free" goodies are. The only way this stands a prayer is for its proponents to be completely up-front about it. calling it 30% would be a start.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-38888688352768470382007-08-28T12:46:00.000-06:002007-08-28T12:46:00.000-06:00A good point. But then, if the Fair Tax exposes j...A good point. But then, <I>if</I> the Fair Tax exposes just how much the government takes, that's certainly a good thing. As it is today, it's a death by a thousand cuts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-62832314937277132612007-08-28T12:18:00.000-06:002007-08-28T12:18:00.000-06:00Heh!Even if we grant that this 30% sales tax can r...Heh!<BR/><BR/>Even if we grant that this 30% sales tax can replace the income tax, we should be calling it 30% and not 23% for another reason: It opens up discussion about how much wealth our government is taking.<BR/><BR/>If it's disingenuous to oppose the "fair tax" on the grounds that it adds too much to a purchaser's cost, so is it to promote it, as Boortz does, as if it's some kind of bargain. "Only" 23%? What kind of friend of small government shies away from talking about the elephant in the room that is extravagant government spending?Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-80914343389581912362007-08-28T12:09:00.000-06:002007-08-28T12:09:00.000-06:00Agreed. Most are accustomed to thinking of a sale...Agreed. Most are accustomed to thinking of a sales tax as a markup and not as a margin. Thus, to make a 'fair' comparison, the Fair Tax rate should be expressed in the same way.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-2791297090777114752007-08-28T10:11:00.000-06:002007-08-28T10:11:00.000-06:00That's what I meant when I conceded his point abou...That's what I meant when I conceded his point about the cost of a house not necessarily changing.<BR/><BR/>Boortz is absolutely right there, but his example is plainly not of a 23% tax on the actual price. Those are two separate issuesGus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-15680143843756211052007-08-28T09:38:00.000-06:002007-08-28T09:38:00.000-06:00RE: Another look at the "Fair Tax"I may be as obtu...RE: Another look at the "Fair Tax"<BR/><BR/>I may be as obtuse as Neil but I didn't think that Neil was speaking to the tax percentages but was instead speaking to Bartlett's implication that an item that retails for $1.00 <B>now</B> will leave your wallet lighter by $1.30 under the Fair Tax. I believe Boortz is clumsily trying to point out that <I>drive out</I> prices should not change under the Fair Tax. Thoughts?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com