On Jan 23, 12:08*pm, Canuck57 wrote:
On 23/01/2010 12:31 AM, nom=de=plume wrote:





*wrote in message
m...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill * wrote in message
news:JtadnTjOk8XYi8fWnZ2dnUVZ_rmdnZ2d@earthlink .com...

* wrote in message
...

"Bill * wrote in message
...

* wrote in message
news:dqnjl5l73fvlugoor8537acghkoavee3ab@4ax. com...

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:40:09 -0500,
wrote:

The top brackets ought to be paying 49%, and there should be no cap
on
earnings subject to social security and medicare taxes.

As long as the top 1% controls 50% of the campaign contributions and
100% of the media you won't see that. They may pass that as the
published top rate but there will be enough tax shelters and
loopholes
so they won't actually pay that.
The government has a long rich history of using the tax code to drive
social policy. If you do politically correct things you get tax
breaks, big ones.

Is why there will never be a flat tax. *Taxation is the ultimate
control.

A flat tax is regressive.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Actually is neither Regressive or Progressive.

You're just wrong. I don't know how to say it politely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax

No, he's not. *Regression means that the more you make, the less you pay -
hardly a flat tax. You have to remember that the theory behind the flat
tax offers no deductions. *It's a simple percentage of your income.

Didn't say regression - said regressive... and punative for those who make
just a bit.

You earn $100. You get to keep $90. You earn $100,000. You get to keep
$90,000. Which would you pick?

90,000 of course. *But it is fair, for each dollar the use is the same.
* Bet the $90,000 earner also worked harder. *Why should he pay 30% when
the lacky gets a 10% rate? *Are we penalizing those who work?

Besides, that whole position is simple-minded. In regard to taxes
there is no choice to be made as the two examples are exactly the
same... they are being taxed equally. It's an easy sixth grade math
problem.

Now if one wanted to discuss compensation, then of course anyone would
take the 100k job. Of course, not everyone is qualified or able to
perform it. But that's a completely different subject.