From: Charles Hixson (charleshixsn@earthlink.net)
Date: Mon Apr 07 2003 - 08:34:47 MDT
matus wrote:
> ...
>
>While I am opposed to progressive taxes, (and involuntary taxation for that
>matter) if we are going to have both, then I have a suggestion. Why not
>just elimate that bottom 50% of wage earners from the income tax, I mean,
>c'mon! It would amount to a 4% tax cut to income tax revenue, some of which
>would be negated by how much would be saved by the IRS only dealing with 140
>million people instead of 280 million. Any politician who proposed this on
>a presidential ticket could get 140 million votes. This would be a
>particularly wise move for republicans in congress to present, as the
>overall change in the tax burden is minimal (or nill if a 4% budget cut is
>associated with the relief for the bottom 50% of wage earners) and Democrats
>will have a significant thing to whine about wiped off their agenda. Though
>they still may cry 'those tax cuts only benefit the rich' if any further
>cuts occur.
>
>Michael Dickey
>
It wouldn't work because most people see themselves as being in the
upper 50% of the population in income, or expect that they will be next
year. This is clearly impossible, but people tend to be optomistic.
My personal thought on the matter is that taxes should be on a simple:
tax = rate * income - povertylevel
basis. With all sources of cash counted as income, and no exemptions
for any reason. If you want to subsidize something, do it outside of
the tax code. This provides incentive to all people at every income
level to increase their income, and doesn't leave anyone to "starve in
the dark". And it's simple. People understand linear equations (though
perhaps not when they are hit with them in math class). People can
generally even understand simple parabolic equations, thought they need
to do a "following" manuver to project them. But linear is the easy and
intuitive one.
-- -- Charles Hixson Gnu software that is free, The best is yet to be.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 07 2003 - 08:42:32 MDT