[TheRealVille]

You are correct - this is the same, consistent approach that I take toward all taxes and regulation. "Sin" taxes supposedly punish people for engaging in legal behavior for there own good. Such taxes are extremely regressive because people with addictions to the targeted substances and behaviors are much more likely to be poor, undereducated, or mentally ill than Americans as a whole.

The fair tax treats all consumers he same. If people who can afford luxuries choose to buy them, then they are free to do so and they are taxed at the same rate as everybody else. The tax encourages saving and investment, which is also available as a choice to those who can afford it. Consumers create markets for investors, so either choice is equally moral and both choices are good for society.

The goal of the fair tax is to slash the cost of administering and complying with the current federal income tax while attracting both domestic and foreign investment. The tax would be less costly for the federal government to enforce and cheaper for businesses and individual taxpayers. There is no downside unless you are an IRS employee, a CPA or tax preparer, or a tax attorney. (There may be a few other losers but the Fair Tax would allow our economy to boom and absorb the displaced employees elsewhere. Luxury taxes punish people who can afford items. it's the same.

The flat tax advocated by Armey, Steve Forbes, and many others would be a vast improvement over the current system, but as long as a federal income tax remains in place, politicians will always create loopholes for themselves.

Like I said, I would enthusiastically support the Fair Tax but the deep pockets of the tax lobbyists will never allow it to happen without a total collapse of our current economic system. Most opponents of the Fair Tax do not even bother to read the proposal for themselves (like you) and depend on some "expert" who agrees with them politically to tell them what to think about the issue.

(I do own two books on the Fair Tax, although I confess that I have read only one of them.)

This could also relate to the luxuries you talk about. Smoking and drinking could just as easily be classified as a luxury item. You talk out of both sides of your mouth Hoot. With you, it all depends on which party supports it, even though it could be considered the same tax. Luxury taxes punish people who can afford to buy said items. Tobacco and alcohol taxes punish the person that uses them. Both classes can do away with the tax buy not buying said items. It's the same Hoot.