Nobody has brought up a VAT here, so let's set that aside. Exactly how is a consumption tax unfair? Don't the wealthy, by definition, consume more?
Not in proportion to how much money they have.
Poor people have to spend all their money just so survive.
Rich people don't spend all their money.
If they did, they would have no money and wouldn't be rich.
Instead they take the money they don't need to survive, and invest it in ways to make more money without working for it.
Oh contrar!!!
Last weeks WSJ covered the possibilities of a VAT in detail.
As to your second belief:...
A consumption tax on "Joe Small" with 98% of income taxed versus Mr. Kennedy...with .000001% of income taxed and the vast bulk turned around untaxed for furthur investment gain is hardly fair. This by the way was also discussed in last week's WSJ