Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: wizard1961

Horrid. We don’t want a ‘progressive’ scale, we want (and for Justice’s sake, need) a flat applies-equally-to-everyone tax.


2 posted on 02/20/2010 8:50:39 AM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: OneWingedShark

“We don’t want a ‘progressive’ scale, “

I want to be sure you realize the “progressive” part applies to giving bigger corporations a bigger reason to hire people in the US.

It does not target “the rich” but instead gives fortune 500 companies incentive to hire in the US. Thanks


5 posted on 02/20/2010 9:09:54 AM PST by wizard1961 (Teaper says: For 2010, let Sarah be Sarah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: OneWingedShark
I read somewhere that if you want less of something, tax it, and more of something, subsidize it. What if we were to give a single mother of one child a set amount, more than enough for 3 children, but if she got pregnant again, then take 1/3 away. Each subsequent pregnancy results in a cut in benefits. I wonder what would happen.

Similarly, what if we taxed higher incomes at a lower rate than lower incomes. Would that drive people to make more money, I wonder. I just propose these as experiments for one state to be a test to see what would happen.

10 posted on 02/20/2010 10:04:51 AM PST by sportutegrl (VETO PROOF MAJORITY IN 2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson