Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (542815)	2/19/2004 3:57:42 PM
From: JDN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

What would make a politician want to shift the tax burden from the very wealthy to the rest of us????? There are so few really wealthy that I read somewhere that if you were to tax the top 1% of income earners a 100% tax rate it would not amount to a hill of beans in our budget. Personally, I abhor the current tax code. I think a flat tax would be a good idea. Your comments about the percentage of TOTAL income earned by the wealthy would insure they pay their fair share of the taxes BUT it wouldnt mean didly overall. IMHO if we took a base figure and made it ABSOLUTELY TAX FREE and tax the rest of us a flat percentage of all GROSS income except capital gains which at the very minimum should be net of capital losses no one would have any reason to complain. Myself, I would like a base figure of 20k and 10% over that. IF that is insufficient to run the govt and IF we cant cut expenditures enough then a modest VAT would insure that EVERYONE pays SOMETHING and we would grasp tax control over illegal income as well which could be material. I could live with a 2% VAT. Some of you researchers and mathmeticians could figure out what all this would mean. jdn