It seems to me that if you want to debate the merits of two systems...you have to have the same revenue from both systems for the sake of discussion. Otherwise you're mixing spending policy with taxing policy.

The two are inextricably intertwined; it's entirely appropriate to discuss both together. Necessary, even, if we're to arrive at coherence in both.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Or maybe you can explain to me how a discussion of moving from our present system to the Fair Tax using different spending numbers clarifies the discussion. It's easy to tweak either system to produce more or less revenue.

In my magic-wand world the conversation would begin with a debate about what the government is going to do and how much it will cost. Once that number is nailed down you move on to deciding how to raise the money. And more importantly, when unforeseen circumstances arise, e.g. post-9/11 military spending vs. "the Bush tax cuts" and the 2008 economic crisis vs. health care, you reopen the conversation.

Unfortunately my magic wand, an Acme (endorsed by Wile E Coyote) from the gitgo, is in the shop for repairs.

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool