People seem to be stuck on the idea of a "sales" tax, payable by the seller, which the "fair tax" is. Better would be a "purchase tax", payable by the purchaser, not by the seller. But, to satisfy the Apportionment Clause, it would not be payable by the final purchaser, who can't pass on the tax to another purchaser in the form of a higher price. That makes it a kind of "value-added" tax, which is what most other nations use. If that approach is thought through, most people should recognize it is better than a "sales" tax.
Repealing the Income Tax Amendment would be acceptance that it had been ratified, which it was not. Congress should simply pass a concurrent resolution finding that it had never been ratified. Much easier to do than adopt an amendment. -- Jon ---------------------------------------------------------------- Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757 512/374-9585 www.constitution.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------- ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
