... I'd prefer a progressive tax, where the burden is
1- distributed more equitably
2- those who gain the most benefit pay more


NOYB wrote:
Great idea! If you're on welfare...pay more. If you're on Medicare...pay
more. If you're on Social Security...pay more. If you live in a
crime-ridden area requiring a higher level of police protection...pay more.
If you ride public transit...pay more.

If you have a huge waterfront mansion that you can only afford because
of tax-subsidized construction & deducting loan interest, pay more.

If you live in a wealthy low-crime neighborhood, it's difficult to see
how you have *less* police protection than a high crime neighborhood.
You certainly have more to lose. And the cops respond quicker & with
more resources when you call.

If you drive a gas guzzling luxury vehicle on public roads (ie paid for
out of tax money- pay more

If you pollute the air & water more with a high consumption life style-
pay more.

If you have an investment portfolio that is protected by the SEC or
other tax-supported agencies- pay more

If you have a health plan that provides good care at public supported
hospitals- pay more

Beginning to get the idea? If you think the poor get more benefits, then
try it yourself. If you like it better, stay poor.


The progressive tax system that we currently use has the top 1% of wage
earners paying 32% of the taxes.

Really? That doesn't quite fit with the last statistics I saw, but *if*
that top 1% has 32% of the overall income, then what is unfair about
making them pay 32% of the taxes?


You have not answered that basic question, just answered with a lot of
whining about how the poor have it made.

DSK