NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/sci/econ/8670

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-15 | 1.7 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!caen!uflorida!reef.cis.ufl.edu!jfh
From: [e-mail] (James F. Hranicky)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: NO! Re: flat taxes - yes!!!
Keywords: flat tax
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Nov 92 19:24:36 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: Univ. of Florida CIS Dept.
Lines: 25
Nntp-Posting-Host: reef.cis.ufl.edu

It seems to me that the best and "fairest" tax would be a flat tax on
consumption (Federal sales tax). This would mean that people of all incomes
would pay the same amount of tax on the same good. (With exemptions on
the necessities of life--food, etc.--but the same exemptions for all.)

Now, some people might call this regressive--the poor pay a larger percent
of their income than the rich--however, this would only be true if the
"rich" lived as if they were poor. In the end, this would mean that
the "rich" would probably pay a larger dollar amount, but the same rate
for consumption. (Of course, I would like to see *Huge* cuts in the Fed
govt along the way, to insure that the rate would decline and be less of
a burden as time goes on--also, the initial rate would bring as close to the
present tax system does in $$ as possible, then spending could be cut to
ru a surplus until the debt was paid off.)

One benefit, offhand, would be to encourage savings--not penalizing people
for saving money. I think this is one of the reasons for Japan's strength
over the past few decades--*savings*.

Of course, until the Keynesian mentality that savings are bad and harmful
is excised, this probably wouldn't gain much popularity.

Jim Hranicky ([e-mail])