[cricket]

"However I have long been a proponent of the Flat Tax as described by Steve Forbes."

Agree; and logically. . .reasonably; it makes the best cents - in a manner of speaking;

. . .so I do not understand why the 'Forbe's formula' for tax reform is not looked at more seriously.

It just does not have the 'appeal' apparently, of the 'tax the rich' MO; which underscores the 'consumption tax'.

[cricket]

disregard multiple ' '. Yikes - nothing like 'overkill'. . . :^)

[phil_will1]

". . .so I do not understand why the 'Forbe's formula' for tax reform is not looked at more seriously."

Perhaps one reason is that it is not, by Mr. Forbes own admission, revenue neutral. According to President Bush's criteria, that is a deal-killer in and of itself.

Secondly, Mr. Forbes backs the Burgess bill, which does not replace a single page of the current code (including the AMT), but instead adds a flat tax option to the 60,000 page mess we now have.

Third, it does not touch one of the biggest problems with our current system, which is the imbedding of the cost of our tax system into our goods, making them less competitive in the world wide market than would otherwise be the case.

That is enough for starters.