You didn't read the quote I posted, excluding lower income people doesn't make it not a flat tax, what makes something a flat tax is when everyone pays the same amout of tax outside of that low income exclusion. This "fair tax" isn't fair and it's definitely flat.
Notice how I did that without calling you any names...
No, you just condescendingly entered that little footnote about how "conservatives love to play semantic games." Don't try to hide behind that self-righteous bullshit.
RICH PEOPLE AND POOR PEOPLE DO NOT PAY THE SAME AMOUNT OF TAX UNDER THE FAIRTAX. This is absolutely incorrect. Under a flat tax, everyone pays x-amount or x-percentage in taxes each year. Under the FairTax, people are taxed based on consumption. If you make $250,000 a year, you are paying more in taxes than a person making $25,000 a year, any way you slice it. In fact, a person making $25,000 a year is probably paying nothing in taxes. Your logic is fundamentally flawed. This is a consumption tax, yet you are treating it as an income tax.
Here are just a few differences between the two:
http://www.pafairtax.org/resrcs/FlatTaxFairTaxComparison.pdfHere's a nice little quote I found that explains the matter pretty well, also:
So why do so many Democrats think the FairTax is regressive? Because they consider taxes relative to annual income rather than resources, and the former is a terrible proxy for the later. Bill Gates's income this year may be zero given what's happening to stocks. If so, a man with over $47 billion in resources will be classified, based on income, as no better off than the homeless. And since Gates's consumption is based on his resources, not his current income, the ratio of this "poor" person's FairTax payments to his income would be sky high. Measuring taxes relative to income will thus suggest regressivity with respect to consumption taxation where none exists.
Again, you know absolutely nothing about the FairTax. The world's greatest economic minds, millions of dollars, and decades worth of work have gone into developing an idea that eliminates the burdensome tax code, protects the privacy of millions of Americans who are victimized by the IRS each year, and does away with the tax burden altogether for the poorest Americans. It is an idea that is environmentally friendly, encourages the purchase of second-hand goods, and will also help to bring manufacturing and industrial jobs back to our country. There's nothing partisan about it -- I'm positive that even Shawn would get behind it if he fully understood it; that is, if he wanted America to be successful in the global landscape that is the economy of the 21st century.