Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Tue, 6 Oct 1992 07:05:20 EDT
From:         K=A*T <MEC038@UKCC.UKY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: new tax scheme

Greetings to Jargon.  Oops, I should have said Jason.  But
what is the difference between Jason/Jargon or Jamie/Jaime
among friends.  :-)

From:         ZIMMERJ@WABASH.BITNET

>> I simply mentioned that a "fair" tax must include tax on wealth  too.

> It depends on how you define "fair."  But you adress that....

Now, you are not saying that "fair" is only a matter of definition
and there are no reasoning behind it, are you?

But I think I suspect what you mean by "fair."  You see,
I think the reasoning behind a flat tax being fair is not
sound or on solid grounds.  The first loop-hole to that
idea comes when you would propose deductions for the poor
(zero brackets) and for individuals.  Why should the next
guy who makes the same amount of money as I do pay less tax
just because he has 10 kids and I have two?

The second loop-hole is that if you want to push your idea
of fairness just a bit more, then you should question the
progressivity of the government spending.  I mean even a flat
tax is progressive if most of the money is funneled back to
the needy.

Now some people say we have to pay taxes according to our
*abilities*.  Well, let me say something about that.  I am
a college professor and have two kids.  My wife works half-time.
I cannot afford to send my daughter to the same school that
I graduated from.  If our roof needs work, I have to borrow the
money for it.  Yet I paid about $400 out of my last $1,000 in
taxes.  Meanwhile Mr. Perot paid only $280 out of his last $1,000.
(Two notes: 1. I doubt if Perot even paid that much considering
all the CPAs who work for him, 2. I paid more than him because
I figured out Social Security Taxes on it.  I willing to let the
difference go if you complain.  But the fact remains that our
last $1,000 incomes were taxed at least at the same rate.)  Now
what irritates me is that our government says Mr. Perot and I
have the same ability to pay taxes on our respective last $1,000.
Now THAT is not fair in my book.

>>Take the  defense budget.  You may argue that the  military is
>>protecting our jobs and therefore our incomes.  Fine.  But I
>>can equally claim that the  military is protecting our property/
>>wealthe EVERY year.  Therefore to be fair I think people should
>>pay federal wealth /property tax.

>If you choose to look at it that way, fine.  I generally evaluate tax schemes
based on whether or not they treat people equally.  Progressive (and regressive
>) taxation clearly fails this test.

Hold on.  That admission was done too hastily.  Fine, as in you are
ambivalent, or fine as in I have a point?  How about a *FLAT* tax on
wealth?  Do you consider THAT fair?

>> And that would not be double taxation.
>>One is income tax and the  other is property/wealth  tax.  You don't
>>have any fundamental problem with  sales tax, do you?  That is also
>>double taxation according to you.

>Yes, it still would be double taxation.  The fruits of the person's labor is
being taxed once when it is originally gained as income, and then again when it
>is held as savings or property.  Maybe you don't think such double taxation is
>bad, but it *is* double taxation.

I have to disagree with you on that.  Are you saying property taxes
are also double taxation?  Well, you paid income tax when you earned
the money and now you have to pay property tax when you use that
money to buy a house.  It's like buying a car: first you pay money
to buy the car, then later, you pay to maintain the car.  Say there is
a flat 13% federal tax on income and a flat 1% federal tax on wealth/
property.  Where is the double taxation there?  The same income is NOT
taxed twice and the same property/wealth is not taxed twice.

>Yes, I do consider a sales tax to be double taxation.  Yes, I have problems
with it partly for that reason, but mainly because it is highly regressive (and
>therefore treats people unequally).  And yes, I would like to see sales taxes
>scrapped when (like we ever actually will) we get a flat tax on income only.

OK, I agree with you there.  A sales tax IS double taxation, especially
if it is federal sales tax.  You see, state sales taxs and federal income
taxes are paid to different entities.

> Thanks for the clarification.

Same here.  BTW: you may be a good economist, but you haven't shown
to be a good judge of character (or gender).  THIS I am as sure
as you seem to be about your claims in economics.

> Jason

--KAT

p.s.  Will you please leave about 1-12 characters right margin so that
I can add quote signs to the beginning of your text?  Thank you.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU