OT: My letter to Ron Paul

OTOH, taxing income is better than many other methods that would definitely be regressive.

Would that be grounded in Constitutional law? Best regards, Spehro Pefhany

There's no point to being right or wrong if you're going to stay depressed all your life.

John

Of course it is.

Biologically, conception is a lot bigger miracle than birth.

John

British common, actually.

John

I'm all for "regressive" taxes... why should people who choose to be bums live off of me?

That is not to say that the truly needy shouldn't be taken proper care of.

I'd go for a flat tax with a minimum income before it applies.

Can you rationalize my paying at a higher RATE than you?

...Jim Thompson

What makes a low income person a bum? You really are a selfish, uncaring person.

It doesn't take any rationalization at all to be comfortable with you paying tax (assuming there's any rationalization for the goverment to take money from you) based on what you spend; at _exactly_ the same rate.

For example, if I buy a $50.00 bicycle, I pay $0.50 in tax. You buy a $50,000 Lexus, ou pay $500 in tax. What could be more equitable?

Of course, grocery store food and medical supplies would be exempt.

But, by the golden rule, the guy that's got the gold makes the rules.

And charity is really the purview of the churches, Salvation Army, and so on.

Jim, have you ever given a buck to a street beggar? Or do you just snoot at him and say something derisive?

Thanks, Rich

Many states, Arizona for one, don't tax food purchased in grocery stores. They do tax restaurant and take-out.

Proponents of the sales-tax-only scheme suggest a rebate for the "poor".

The flat tax with a minimum income exclusion works better because the "poor" don't have to pay a tax in the first place, as with sales taxes.

Communists, like Bowey, adhere to "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", a slogan popularized by Karl Marx.

But this is the typical rant of those of the "Unfair, unfair, you can't make more money than me" crowd.

Calling them village idiots is too kind.

...Jim Thompson

One important benefit of a sales tax only would be that it *could* eliminate the entire income tax collection scheme and all the accompanying intrusions into personal privacy such as mandatory payroll reporting, investment transaction reporting, mandatory payroll deductions and so on. Any company that does not comply with government decrees in such matters can be dealt with severely, including the death penalty (dissolution), and usually big companies are eager to comply with all such regulations.

But maybe companies and financial institutions are going to spy on all their customers/employees, and pass the information along to the government anyway, for "security" reasons.

True or not, there have been numerous stories of abuse of IRS audits to shut people up, for example. RM Nixon in particular, but I think there have been others.

Best regards, Spehro Pefhany

Sales tax only would be great. Tax everything, and give poor people a lump-sum weekly or monthly stipend, so they have the same spending incentives that everyone else has.

The "consumption" tax that some people are now proposing is just another complication to an already disgraceful and damaging tax code. It would add to an individual's income taxes based on a computation of how much they consume.

A true sales tax, eliminating both personal and corporate income taxes, would help the US retain manufacturing jobs.

John

Essentially what the Fair Tax movement proposes:

Can someone explain to me what "progressive", "regressive", and "flat" tax actually mean, in plain English?

So far, I've only seen them used as boogeymen.

Thanks, Rich

How about 'Free Range Idiots'?

Let me guess, JosephKK, your annual income is less than $50K ?:-)

...Jim Thompson

Jim Thompson snipped-for-privacy@My-Web-Site.com posted to sci.electronics.design:

It is about to cross to over 6 digits, i am a poorly paid engineer.

I have s 6-digit income, if you count cents. )-;

Cheers! Rich