To: kevkrom
The flat tax, if taken literally, encompasses the Milton Friedman concept of a negative income tax. So yes, I'd get rid of the EITC only because the flat tax (or consumption tax based on income less personal allowances less savings/investments) could include the concept. But the negative income tax was designed to replace welfare.
And the EITC is one of the weirdest tax ideas...hard to compute, file for, is confusing and horribly abused.
171 posted on
03/03/2004 11:06:27 PM PST by
Fledermaus
(John Kerry is simply a liar. The man can't differentiate campaign rhetoric with facts!)
To: Fledermaus
The flat tax, if taken literally, encompasses the Milton Friedman concept of a negative income tax. So yes, I'd get rid of the EITC only because the flat tax (or consumption tax based on income less personal allowances less savings/investments) could include the concept. But the negative income tax was designed to replace welfare. Other than the objections I have, is there any draf or introduced legislation that even comes close to the "Milton Friedman concept"? The only real flat tax proposal is the Armey version, and it doesn't sound like what you're talking about.
And the EITC is one of the weirdest tax ideas...hard to compute, file for, is confusing and horribly abused.
No argument from me on that one.
189 posted on
03/04/2004 7:13:05 AM PST by
kevkrom
(Ask your Congresscritter about his or her stance on HR 25 -- the NRST)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson