On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 09:55:10 -0400, DSK wrote:
If all the people earning less than $30K per year earn 30% of the income
in the nation, then wouldn't it be fair if they paid 30% of the income
tax burden?
If the people earning over $200K per year have 50% of the nations
income, then they *should* pay more than 50% of the nation's income tax.
Wouldn't that be fair?
PocoLoco wrote:
If those making less than $30,000 paid 30% of their income, then those making
$200,000 should pay 30% of their income. The first group would pay $9000, and
the second would pay $60,000. What's not fair about that?
Now, go back and answer the questions in my other post.
I asked you first. Is the math too complex for you?
As for what's "not fair" about a flat tax, it's a matter of what you see
as "fair." I don't have a big problem with a flat tax, but it is
regressive... ie the less wealthy pay a higher share of overal tax
revenue, and it cuts into their livable income more (thus is bad for the
economy). I'd prefer a progressive tax, where the burden is
1- distributed more equitably
2- those who gain the most benefit pay more
3- provides more revenue to the gov't relative to the impact on the economy.
*Now* can you answer my question? What's not fair about a progressive
tax which distributes the income tax burden equitably across income
brackets?
DSK
Your definition of equity.
--
John H
"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."
|