HR 900 Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Off-topic' started by AeroShooter, Aug 20, 2007.

  1. AeroShooter

    AeroShooter New Member

    6,313
    0
    0
    On August 18, 2007, at the GCO Summer Luncheon, Rep. Timothy Bearden briefed the attendees on House Resolution 900, which would in short replace property & ad valorem taxes in the State of Georgia with a tax on services and asked for the support of the GCO membership. I'm opening this thread to provide a forum to debate the pros & cons of this resolution.

    Link to the full text:

    http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2007 ... /hr900.htm
     
  2. ber950

    ber950 Active Member

    3,562
    2
    38
    Don't forget he also said this is an outline that will be replaced with a substitute bill. Look for changes during the next session.
     

  3. Wiley

    Wiley New Member

    2,609
    0
    0
    I read over HR900 yesterday. While the concept is better than what we have now, I strongly object to trying to call a flat tax the FairTax. They are not the same. Never have been, never will be. To continue to do so is nothing more than politicspeak.

    It makes me wonder what other half-truths and outright lies the pols have buried in it.
     
  4. M249

    M249 New Member

    3,033
    0
    0
    If they call anything the Fair Tax that's not, the Fair Tax, they're violatin' the law. I believe The Fair Tax is a registered trademark of Americans for Fair Taxation.
     
  5. Wiley

    Wiley New Member

    2,609
    0
    0
    I know. Get on the General Assembly site and read the bill. Really would like to have something like the FairTax, tho'. As opposed to a flat tax.
     
  6. EagleEye920

    EagleEye920 Member

    904
    0
    16
  7. luke0927

    luke0927 New Member

    754
    0
    0
    The flat tax does not work its been tried we need the fair tax!
     
  8. Vir Quisque Vir

    Vir Quisque Vir New Member

    703
    0
    0

    I agree, a Fair Tax is better by far. Problem is getting politicians to agree to it before the election. Most will support it, but want to see what it will look like in its final form before voting on it. Not an unreasonable request. There is a lot of grass root support from several sides of the political spectrum, so it seems to have wide support by those who have read up on it. I thought it was kind of silly until I read more about it and it really makes great sense for our republic. My suggestion is to just read more about it and find out what it does and does not mean. If you will excuse the pun, give it a fair shake.
     
  9. foshizzle

    foshizzle New Member

    1,283
    0
    0
    It's a lot better for property owners than people like me that just have cars. I won't have the ad valorum tax on my vehicles but I'll still be stuck with the 4% tax on services. Property owners will save a lot more than I will with just 300 bucks on two cars. I guess it's an incentive to own property. It also hits the illegals in the pockets since they have to spend just like I do.

    I'm for it in theory but these things tend to get bastardized as time goes on. In it's simplest terms it should work. I also like the way Mr. Bearden explained how schools and services get their money. I think that's 'fair'. One thing I'm not sure on is how rich areas like Alpharetta can get the extra services that they pay for to make them safer than the Fulton ghetto unless they... what... impose an additional tax? 2/3'rds vote on it?

    Time will tell. I'm cautiously optimistic.
     
  10. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,387
    394
    83
    I questioned Speaker Richardson about it last night, and his editorial appears in today's AJC.
     
  11. gsusnake

    gsusnake Token Liberal Hippie

    13,622
    27
    48
    The AP ran a piece about it casting it in a negative light.

    It ran (two different versions) in the Statesboro Herald and the Savannah Morning News. The Herald version had fewer big words and was skewed more to how it's a bad thing for senior citizens (no reasons given, just "it's bad"), and the Morning News version read like a Maureen Downey editorial.
     
  12. AeroShooter

    AeroShooter New Member

    6,313
    0
    0
    Huh? I would argue that this is a particular boon for senior citizens... no more getting taxed off your property.
     
  13. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,387
    394
    83
    Imagine you are 40 and own 150 acres. When you are 90, your retirement income may not be enough to pay the taxes. You just want to enjoy your property, raise tomatoes, shoot, and take walks in the century-plus old oak forest with your great-grandkids, but the stinking county will take your land and SELL it to pay the taxes.