Progressive Tax is better than a Flat Tax for taxation

"Everyone is not a tax breaker, I am not here to justify all the loopholes in the US progressive tax but to call all the American tax payers law breakers seems a little biased"Untrue, there are 80,000 pages of legislaion in your proposal, aka the current tax code. It is IMPOSSIBLE to follow every single peice of legislaion in there, we are all going to be law breakers because of this, and we wouldnt even know it. "Those 50% are the ones who are almost dirt poor, they are the ones living on borderline poverty, if not already deep within poverty. They are not your snooty neighbors next door or your dickish bosses who are not paying income taxes, it is those who truly have nothing to give back because they make so little in the first place."This is false, 15% of americans are in poverty, earning under 50,000 dollars or less, so those 50% nuber of people being dirt poor is false. "There is a difference between job creators and the wealthy. All the jobs that have been created have come from small companies while the large ones are only focusing on increasing productivity, not hiring more people. So to bestow the title of "job creators" on only the fabulously rich companies is very misguided."This is fase as well. There is difference you right, but it has its failings. A flat tax would help mall buissness, I will touch on that later. The largones focus on productivity, that actually proves my point. To increase production you need more workers. Here's a example a wndy's with 5 workers or a wendy's with 50 workers, IN which senarion would you get yout burger faster? So yes, small buissness make most jobs, but the big ones do too. Now I will talk about the small buissness. Well, the average incomeof a smal buissnes is slightly over 200,000 dllars, on a progressive system they would be taxed more, making higher unemployment, so there's where the 9% flat tax comes in handy. "You just admitted that in a flat tax the burden would fall on the nations poor because you automatically claim they could simply get jobs when in this economy your dad cant even get a job, so how do can you simply expect every poor person in America to get a job in this economy when even your dad is struggling to do just that. You also show how income is a bad proxy for consumption because of how much they spend to support their families, but that just reinforces my point about how the lower and middle classes have less to give and do put money back into the economy."So you say my dad can't get a job, he is a doctor ha is buying a building so he will have a job in a few months. So ok at what I said earlier, you say it would be hard to get a job under the current system. Duh! A flat tax as I said would let small buissness havemor emoney and hire more people, and a large company to hire more because they have more money leadng to more efficiency. "If you tax the rich less they wont expand more they will only save and hoard more"How is that possible, you just said they wanted to increase iffeciency so they wll sped more temporarily by making more buildings and hireing workers, then they will acheive this goal, so if they have more money they will expand and lose money to get mor emoney. EX: my uncle owns a oil company in texas, he has tax breaks currently because his state recognises his importance for the texan economy. So this helps him expand more and more to do what he does, extract oil and create jobs and ake money. "A progressive tax allows for lower tax brackets for the lower classes so that they are not given a crushing tax burden, but it allows the rich to be taxed higher because they have far far more to give and the wealth they do have is sitting in a bank vault somewhere and not helping the economy in any way" Well first f all, they wont save it all as I have said, I have experience with rich people. And with flat tax those ower brakets will aquire jobs easier, so your system messs that up so they will live in the goverment dull. Therefore making the benifits to your system short lived. "As for your 75% argument, your implication that is not fair does not take into account how much each already has and how much more the rich make over the middle and lower classes."Once again, who makes the jobs? And I do take into account for the less fortunate, Since under a flat tax they would have a higher chance for a job then they make more money, and will afford the tax. "A progressive tax allows the lower classes (who have little to give) to be exempt, allows the middle class to pay a decent sum (even though they pump most of what they earn back into the economy) and allows the rich to pay a large amount of taxes (because they make tons of money in salaries and the wealth they do have is being hoarded away)"Your misng the main point of my argument, more jobs = mor emoney= everyone is richer. My point proves that a flat tax is benifitial no matter who you are. And it is more fair because everyone pays for what they use. You also state the rich whs to small buissnes ranging form big buissnes need to pay more. Well they still technically do. 9% if 1,000,000 is higher then 9% of 15,000."A flat tax can impose a very harsh tax on the poor, the ones who really really would be harmed by a tax rate, and at the same time it would make the rich just richer, and that money would just be hoarded into a private account. Often a flat tax does BOTH of these... How do you see THAT as fair, how does shifting the tax burden from the rich to the poor justified?" Please stop repeating. If you have a job then you will accumulate weal, making it less harsh then the current system of n income, + expenses. I will now add to my argument because you clearly dont get the gist of the economy and tax rates. I am in the 40% tax bracket, so you progressive system is %^&*. In a flat tax I get taxed 9% then my dad can hire more workes which stimulates the economy. What Is a Flat Tax? Unlike the current system, a flat tax is simple, fair, and good for growth. Instead of the 893 forms required by the current system, a flat tax would use only two postcard-sized forms: one for labor income and the other for business and capital income. Unlike the current system, which discriminates based on the source, use, and level of income, a flat tax treats all taxpayers equally, fulfilling the "equal justice under law" principle etched above the main entrance to the U.S. Supreme Court building. And unlike the current system, which punishes people for contributing to the nation's wealth, a flat tax would lower marginal tax rates and eliminate the tax bias against saving and investment, thus ensuring better economic performance in a competitive global economy. (1) There have been several flat tax proposals over the years, all of them based on the pathbreaking proposal developed by two Hoover Institution economists. While no two plans are identical, they all share common features that fix the major flaws of the current Internal Revenue Code. Simplicity and fairness are also natural consequences of these component features of tax reform. (1) All flat tax proposals have a single rate, usually less than 20 percent. The low, flat rate solves the problem of high marginal tax rates by reducing penalties against productive behavior, such as work, risk taking, and entrepreneurship. (1) Elimination of Special Preferences. Flat tax proposals would eliminate provisions of the tax code that bestow preferential tax treatment on certain behaviors and activities. Getting rid of deductions, credits, exemptions, and other loopholes also helps solve the problem of complexity, allowing taxpayers to file their tax returns on a postcard-sized form.(1) I'm sorry I have ran out of characters in this round. I'll finish it next round. http://www.heritage.org... (1)http://nj.npri.org... (2) http://christopher-pascale.suite101.com...www.hermancain.com/999plan