Quote:
Originally Posted by kretinus
The flat tax is the simplest, fairest proposal out there, the idea that someone should pay a higher percentage just because they make more is ludicrous.
|
It's the simplest plan out there, I'll give you that.
I've outlined above why I think its fairness is in doubt. Adam Smith presented the idea nicely in 1789 in
The Wealth of Nations:
Quote:
|
The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
|
You can feel free to disagree with me, but I think dismissing my point as "ludicrous" is shortsighted - especially as this philosophy is the bedrock of our current tax code.