Don't confuse me with the facts.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Some people have ideas that just can't be supported by the evidence. You know people like that. Chances are good that you even have a few notions of your own which can't be supported by the evidence. Or lack of evidence, bearing in mind you can't use a negative to prove anything.

But a stamp doesn't really make it evidence either. It's just stamped that way.

What can you do with people like that?

You present the evidence to them. Sometimes it's a simple case that they do not know any better.

Show 'em the fallacy of their belief and they change. Sometimes.
 Some people just absolutely refuse to learn. I do not refer you to a number of elected officials in my community, albeit they are poster children for that statement.

 Like this one. Po folks don't pay taxes. http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2011/05/31/three_lies_about_taxes/index.html

When you start REALLY look at taxes in this nation, po folks pay a lot of taxes.

If you advance your math a little bit, you see that in some cases po folks pay more, based on a percentage of their income, than rich folks.

Since I am NO good at numbers, I'ma try to give you this simple example. To keep it even more simple, we're gonna assume the same expenses across the board. Expenses include taxes.

Now because the po folks rent, the real estate taxes collected where they live are higher than the rich folks. Why? Rich folks get to declare a homestead exemption which lowers their property taxes. But to keep this simple, I'ma leave the housing expense the same across the board.

Who has more money left over?

In this example, the amount of taxes paid are the same across the board. Call it 10 worth of taxes for everything.

That 10 is 10 percent of the po folks money. That 10 is one percent of the rich folks money.

My tax return for this past year. Still got it wrong.

Now in the real world, this example won't be so clear cut because the amount of expenses in each column won't be the same. BUT! The amount of taxes based on a percent of the income will be pretty dang close.

Very close. Closer than you are probably willing to admit.

But yassee, this is math, a subject which I am no good at, but one which I will make an attempt to understand when it is important. The problem is most people won't bother to understand it because it is far more complicated that Paris Hilton having a new show on Oprah's TV network.

No. I know they are stupid.

This simple math illustrates why Herman Cain's drive for a national 23 percent sales tax, even with a "prebate" for po folks to keep them from paying this tax is astronomically absurd. Cain and proponents of the 23 percent tax will strenuously argue my facts and math are wrong and will haul out Albert Einstein's ghost to prove it.

Never mind the idea that many po folks have no idea how to balance their monthly household budget or save money. Give 'em the "prebate" at the beginning of the year and by the end of January, all the money is gone. Not all, no indeed. But a lot of 'em to be sure.

When they run out the "prebate" and are spending 23 percent of their income on taxes for food, they are gonna be in serious fiscal straights in VERY short order.

At the same time, I also believe if such people can't manage their lives and what they have, it's not my responsibility to take care of 'em.

The problem with reconciling the three above statements is: The kids are gonna be hurt the worst.

When you run right down to the lowest common denominator, any time the government gets involved with the personal lives of adults, kids get hurt. I include the foster care system in this statement, albeit the pain caused by that system is often less than the kids were getting with their natural parents.

Simple truth is: There is no completely fair tax.