It sounds like your understanding of the FairTax might be retarded, but if you read the bill (it's only a bit over 100 pages long), you might be able to change some of your misconceptions.

Please elaborate. Why is it not enforceable? Almost every state in the U.S. runs that way, why can't the federal government? Why do they have to invade every citizen's privacy to tax them on income? There are fewer retail businesses than there are wage earners - it's easier for the IRS to watch over the retail business, just because the numbers are fewer.

I didn't know the U.S. government was supposed to watch out for German concerns. Wouldn't it be great if U.S. auto companies got a leg-up on foreign competition? What would happen? BMW would build more cars in the U.S.! What happens now? The cars are taxed when they are sent to the U.S., and the person who buys it had his income taxed more than 23% before he spent a dime. Why pay taxes on every penny you make? Just pay taxes when you spend it!

No, you might want to read the bill before you blast it. Education and investments aren't taxable. Neither is charitable giving, savings, inheritance or buying used goods. Don't just listen to what the talking heads say, do a little of your own investigation, and compare it to what we have now for a federal revenue system.

Maybe you should take some higher-level courses. What stops them from raising prices is competition. When you tax an industry, you allow all participants in the sector to raise their prices to cover the tax increase. If one company finds a tax loophole, they'll be able to undercut the other players, and force everyone else to find a way to cut their costs, so they can cut prices. Yes, they may be able to sit on higher profits for a while, but anyone who has gotten out of econ 101 knows, growth is the only measuring stick that matters. Cash sitting idle in corporate coffers is not how you win the game.

Here's one corporation using loopholes to dodge billion$ in taxes. Would a black market be any worse? Don't hate the new idea because it's not perfect. What we have now sucks, so I'll take an improvement, warts and all.

The ridiculously complex tax code is to blame. It's time to flush it and start again. That's one of the concepts behind H.R.25, also known as the FairTax.

It's a misconception that corporations pay taxes. They don't. They get all their money from their customers (and some from investment). If you raise corporate taxes, the corporation raises prices to cover the tax. Why hide it like this? Just tax the customer, so we can all SEE how much tax we're paying. It's the only way to keep people involved in the battle to lower government spending, which is out of control.

So they're trying to tell me that within 600 million years of the big bang, that galaxy managed to get 13 billion light years away from where our galaxy now lies? Even if we and it are at opposite ends of the universe, it would have to have gotten 6.5 billion light years from the center of the universe in those 600 million years, yes? It sounds like it must have been going a bit over the speed limit, don't you think? It got that far away, and still had time to form into a galaxy? Why is my slide rule melting as I try to figure out how it got so far away so quickly? Maybe the light took 13 billion years to reach us, but it's been going around in circles? If so, that Galaxy might be a LOT closer, as the crow flies.

Where is the discussion about why the internet can't kill classic TV? The article started out worrying about Rupert Murdoch's increasing empire, and then devolved into a "everything I hate about the internet" speech. In particular, how video interviews are inferior to the printed word, because they're harder to search, you can't pick just the bit you want to read, and you can't "space out" while watching it.

The author seems to think all the "popular" sites will squeeze out the "old school" content, because if they don't join in the "linearized" content, they can't monetize their content. Hopefully, not everyone will feel a need to monetize what they provide, and we'll be able to share in people's passions, not just their livelihood. I may not like what you're selling me, but I'll be interested in what interests you, and Rupert Murdoch can't have that.

I think there is strong evidence that humans much older than 18 months cannot make a delineation between sentient beings and inanimate objects.

If the supplied evidence is not enough, try this.

I'm guessing you don't really want an answer, but since you asked...

The HR.25 prebate does *not* require ANY form to be filled out. It is automatic. Under the current system, you have to do hours of paperwork to comply with your tax responsibility. That costs us billions in lost productivity annually. Under HR.25, all you need to do to support the federal government is buy stuff. NO paperwork by you, and a 4-line form (the same sales tax form that businesses are already filing) for retailers. They no longer have to do payroll taxes (PITA, just ask any small business owner), corporate taxes, FICA, etc.

Why a prebate? Simple. Rather than start making things complex with lots of exemptions (milk is exempt from tax, but cheese isn't, etc), the prebate allows for tax-free purchases by giving each household the money that they should be spending on tax for necessities. You don't have to use it to pay for the tax, you can buy crack and smoke it if you want. It just makes sure that the working poor are not burdened (unlike the current system that means working poor pay WAY MORE % of their paychecks in taxes than anyone else).

It would be great to just let you keep your money, but taxation is the price of living in a society. Hopefully, if HR.25 passes, you and everyone else will SEE how much the government gets, and will want to work on out-of-control government spending. THAT is the real problem!

Thanks for the non-FUD based criticism. Next time, could you try for an informed non-FUD based criticism?

If you read HR.25, you'll see that it includes a "prebate." Every head of household receives a check from the federal government each month to cover the tax that would be paid on necessities (for a family of 4, that check will be > $500/month). A family of 4 making around $50K per year would actually pay NO tax to the federal gov't (assuming they buy a used car instead of new, etc). That makes HR.25 very progressive. Under the current system, it is widely held that 1/2 of all Americans don't pay federal tax. This is a misconception. They don't pay Income tax, but the FICA (can't escape that unless you work FOR the gov't) is VERY regressive. That is eliminated with HR.25 (Social security is funded from general revenue, not a separate tax).

Now might be a good time for the House of Representatives to look at HR.25, and if they pass it, then getting the IRS back on its feet would suddenly become a VERY low priority.

You should set up multi-level encryption. Encrypt your mildly interesting stuff with one key, and the really nasty stuff with another. When they seize your computer, let them beat you for a bit, then give up the mildly interesting key. They'll give you an ice-pack, and when they find the deeper encryption, just say, "that's old junk, I forgot the password to that, and never got around to deleting it."

Now why would it need a TV tuner? It's not going to get the content from from an OTA antenna, and it's not going to get it from DishTV either. It's going to get it from the interwebs!

How is it different from your desktop w/Boxee? It's going to have a power plug, a video/audio plug, and an Ethernet plug. My grand mama can plug it in and watch dancing babies on Youtube. No OS to install, no drivers to load, just grab the remote and surf for brain-numbing "entertainment."

why the poor science education in the United States is such a big problem?

Obviously I meant to say "creepy uncle" instead of parents. What was I thinking?