Flat Tax

"the richer should be taxed more because they use more resources"OK, so my opponent has the decided to make the argument here, that is random, but OK. First my opponent needs to define what he sees as "rich". Is it the top 1%? Top 5%? Top 10%? What is the rich to him? For that matter, what is the poor? He has no sources to back him up. "the rich use more police, courts, transportation systems, national parks and resources, IRS workers, space flight use, represent more needing protected with the military, etc. "Uh. .. .. WTF? ! OK, look not trying to be rude but I have no idea what my opponent just said. There is no logic behind it. How do the rich, by my opponent's definition, "use up" more police. I think poor people cause more crime than rich people. Also, rich people never really join the police. In terms of transportation, the "rich" would probably take planes if by rich we mean in terms of money. The "poor" then would probably take more cars and walk on sidewalks or subways, thus using up more transportation. Rich people rarely join the army and being in the army should not be taxes because these men are fighting for our country and risking their lives. Your entire argument really makes no sense and while I am only addressing a few, I think the voters would agree. Right now I would like to take some to address the fact that my opponent did not follow the most simple rule that round 1 is for acceptance. I request the point of conduct. My opponent also sucks are grammar because she does not capitalize letters so I request the point of spelling and grammar. "the government often must redistribute to the poor just for the basics. food stamps, health, whatever. i'm sure we could squibble about what the poor should have access to, but by far most people agree they should have access to at least the basics,"Yet we still do not know who the poor is. However going back to money, my opponent seems to think that the wealth is fixed to the rich and that it is there responsibility to help the poor, but in a free market there is not fixed amount. A free market creates new wealth. He seems to think that natural law (whatever that is) allows a poor person to become rich and that man made law does not, but what is natural law? Onto my own arguments. A Flat Tax Creats Economic GrowthA flat tax lowers the current tax rates and allows people to save more and invest more allowing a boost in the economy. Even if it grows as low as 0.5%, the average family would have $5,000 that they would have under current tax laws. Instant Wealth CreationThere is a possibility that a flat tax could boost national wealth to $5 trillion. Part of this reason is because all income-producing assests would rise in value since the flat tax would increase the after-tax stream of income that they generate. SimplicityThe IRS, which manages our tax, itself costs a lot of money to run and is very complex in terms of tax returns. With a flat tax, taxes is simply put a postcard-sized form. This saves tens of billions of dollars. FairnessEveryone in this system is treated equally. It does not matter if you are a CEO of a big corporation or someone working at McDonald's, a flat tax is fair. Basically, the complex progressive tax that our country has right now taxes people based on income, but a flat tax does not and taxes everyone fairly. For example, no matter if you ma $100 or $1,000,000 if a law says you both pay 10%, you will give up 10% of your income. That is fair and equal. Ends CorruptionWhile this nation's progressive tax system allows for corruption, a flat tax eliminates all deductions, looholes, credits, and exemptions. Politicians would lose their power to use the tax code to pick winners and losers and because the flat is pro-growth, corporations would not waste their times hiring lobbyists for their own special interests from the government. Even if it does not get rid of all corruption, it gets rid of a large amount. . http://www.heritage.org...