fair tax is not revenue neutral

http://www.fairtax.org...

the fair tax is good because it's progressive.
it's alledgely good because it doesn't go above 23% for anyone, and again for most it's progressively better.
it's good for the poorest because they won't pay anything after rebate, and those who do earn little will pay very little because of the rebate.
it's good for potential businesses who won't have to pay taxes, and only have to worry about the increased costs of material.
it's good because productivity alone isn't taxed.

the problem is funding the tax. admittedly... there's much savings from compliance costs taht would go into the system given that 20 cents to the dollar under the old system is used only for compliance with out convoluted system... also, instead of allowing the rich to pay a capital gains tax and less than everyone else as a percentage, they'd theoretically have to pay more (warren buffet, the third richest man in the world, does not like that he pays only 17% through capital gains etc, yet his secretary who makes 60k pays like 25-30percent) the idea would be the rich have more and buy more stuff so they'd pay more.

my problem is that is that surely, i contest, the rich do not spend enough now to pay for this new system at the same gov spending level, it's not revenue neutral so to speak using their lingo, givne how the old system was funded. the old system made them pay 15-30 percent fed tax. to get to those levels now, they'd have to spend almost all their money.

if the increases from compliance costs and from noncapital gains were suficient, it's not really "fair" because the rich should pay more in tax. but, as it looks, it doesn't look even practially able to pay for the old system without taxing more.

Actually, the FairTax has been proven to be revenue neutral. For a simple evidenciary claim, I look to "Taxing Sales Under the FairTax: What Rate Works" http://www.fairtax.org...

This is done by an independent agency, and essentially they found that a 23% rate works. "This study...shows that a 23 percent rate is eminently feasible..." It's a long read, but if you're up for it, it uses a lot of math and economic terminology, so enjoy!

This study takes into account your arguments, but also incorporates equations that deal with capital gains, increases and decreases at the market level, tax evasion that is rendered virtually impossible by the FairTax, etc. There has been a study done that showed the rate needs to be higher, done by Gale in 2005, but this study post dates that and actually builds on Gale's analysis.

Thanks!