<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>

      <rss version="2.0">		
        <channel>
          <title>WashingtonWatch.com - Comments for S. 296, The Fair Tax Act of 2009</title>
          <link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills</link>
          <description></description>
          <managingEditor>info@washingtonwatch.com</managingEditor>
          <generator>http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1</generator>
          
<item>
<title>Comment by Clifton McWilliams (July 27, 2009, 13:33:58)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_296.html#63303</link>
<description>Since the bill would create 10-20 million new jobs, from US investors and foreign investors I don't unstand how anyone in the government could possbily vote against this bill....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">63303@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 12:33:58 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by jjohnson (February 7, 2009, 17:56:52)</title>
<link>http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/111_SN_296.html#51203</link>
<description>I am amazed at the number of people voting against the support of a Bill that would promote the most fair and advantageous system of taxation for all US citizens.
1.) The Fair Tax bill would be a dollar for dollar replacement of the current tax system based on the consumption of product rather than income. Since we all know that the US economy is a consumer driven economy, there is little doubt that it would work. 2.)It would generate taxes from the &quot;economic underground&quot; (illegal immigrants, drug dealers, etc.) who currently do not pay income tax, but would contibute to our tax base if they paid a consumer tax on all of the goods that they buy. 3.)It would bring most of our jobs that have been shipped overseas back to our own shores by eliminating imbedded taxes at each level of production, repealing the payroll tax, and making manufacture in the US more economically advantageous for foreign investment.Go to the site www.fairtax.org to read the economic studies that support this....</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">51203@http://www.washingtonwatch.com</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 07 Feb 2009 16:56:52 EST</pubDate>
</item>
        </channel>
      </rss>
  		