No, they should sit on their ass and not contribute a thing to society.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Gilligan" wrote in message
. ..

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
You mean saying that I don't know, but saying that it should be fair
isn't responsive?

Basically, if you're more well-off, you should pay more both numerically
and as a percentage. Thus, if someone makes $30K a year and has three
kids, she shouldn't be paying as high a percentage of her income as
someone who makes $250K a year and has three kids. Let's say say the
$30Ker pays 10% (which I think is way, way too high, but ok). That's a
pretty big percentage of a small income. Now take the $250Ker. She's
paying $25K, which while not insignificant, leaves a whopping $225K for
expenses, whatever. What would be wrong with the $250Ker paying 20%. This
still leaves $200K, which is plenty to live on.

Obviously, this can't be an absolute scale, but the trend should be
obvious.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

So what you are saying is that the person earning 225K$ a year should fire
the 30K$ nanny she has hired and give that money to the government in the
form of taxes.

So now we have one unemployed person and a wealthier person taking home
less.

Great idea!