Replies

"However, their solution - the Flat Tax - is totally inadequate for the magnitude of the problem. It is the equivalent of treating a cancer patient with aspirin"

Well what do you suggest, a "national sales tax" or VAT or "consumption tax'? I think these would be regressive.

Or are you a "one tax" person, like who was it? Henry George? Is that right? Only a tax on property? I'd go with that, but only if you restricted the franchise to those same tax paying property owners.

Let me know, je suis curious! (Like John Kerry, NOT! His motto, taxes: the more the better!)

The Texas Constitution, not too long ago, said that those supported by the county were not allowed to vote. Welfare is administered by the county, I believe.
Also, those who paid property taxes were the only ones allowed to vote on bond issues. Of course, those provisions have disappeared from the document.

Well what do you suggest, a "national sales tax" or VAT or "consumption tax'? I think these would be regressive.

Try the NRST, H.R.25 "The FairTax Act

All legal residents will receive a FCA equivalent to the FairTax paid on essential goods and services The FCA will be paid in advance, in equal installments each month. The size of the monthly FCA will be determined by the government's PovertyLevel for a particular family size, multiplied by the tax rate.

In otherwords every legal resident will receive the same amount regardless of income level in place of personal exemptions of the income/payroll tax system the NRST replaces.

The beauty of the FairTax is that you can control how much you pay in taxes. If you happen to save, invest or spend a portion on used [previously taxed] items, you can get your effective tax rate below 9%.

To illustrate the plan's progressive nature we can examine the tax burden that a family of four will have at various annual spending levels (as opposed to , annual income levels of the income tax).

Actually, I am a one-tax person. Take the federal budget which is effected (usually) in October. Divide that number by the number of citizens in the U.S. Each owes the resulting number. Bill Gates pays what I pay. The street bum pays what I pay. If a couple has 8 kids, that couple pays 10 "shares."

I get the same "benefit" from government as Gates and the street bum. Why should any of us pay more than the other?

That system is not only fair, but it would immediately put a halt to the designs of our voracious, free-spending (Republican, if I need to remind anyone) Congress and our Prescription Drug Welfare, vetoless (Republican) President.

"Well what do you suggest, a 'national sales tax' or VAT or 'consumption tax'? I think these would be regressive."

I favor the FairTax proposal, as articulated by Ancient Geezer in post #14. It is a National Retail Sales Tax, but it has a rebate to make it progressive. It is much fairer and simpler than the current system and has a myriad of other benefits over the Flat Tax, the current system and any other tax reform proposal.