Replies

According to CCH, the tax system, which was 23,000 pages when Jimmy Carter described it as a "disgrace" in 1976, is now up to app. 60,000 pps. At the rate it is growing, it will exceed 100,000 pages by 2010.

Honestly, the number of pages is completely meaningless. Red herring. And besides, I'm completely in favor of cleaning up and simplifying income tax, and that starts with electing the right people to do this. But I haven't read one lucid argument yet why we need to completly scrap in favor of a theoretical one. We're talking about very serious business here.

Many uninformed Americans assume that it is.

Yeah, you know what? Spare me your 'subtle' insults in the future, ummkay?

And CCH isn't the "tax system." It's a company that publishes a cumulative record of everything having to do with taxes (legislation, rulings, hearings, etc.) going back to 1913! Including CCH's comments! So, yeah, a cumulative record is gonna get bigger.

"Honestly, the number of pages is completely meaningless. Red herring."

It is the best way to quantify the cancerous growth in complexity that characterizes the current system. If you have a more meaningful measurement, by all means, I would love to hear it.

"We're talking about very serious business here."

Indeed we are. The current system has long been recognized as a disaster and it gets worse every year. Continuing into the 20th century in an increasingly global economy with a tax code that puts our producers at a decided disadvantage vs their counterparts in other countries is ridiculous. I will grant you that fundamental change has associated risk. As I tried to point out on my previous post, doing nothing has substantial risk associated with it, also. Sorry if I didn't word that as diplomatically as I could have, but the point remains the same.