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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (218348)	2/13/2007 11:40:02 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The only truly "fair" tax system...$3T Federal budget, 300M people. Fed tax bill = $3T/300M = $10K per person [not household]. Only if everyone has the same income. It's like (ok not exactly like but I like the metaphor) all of us going to a restaurant, some get caviar and others get canned tuna on toast but everyone gets the same bill. There are a couple of good arguments for progressive taxation: 1. The reality of the world we live in is that some stones gather much more moss than others and will continue to do so unabated until all of the moss is gathered on one stone or a small minority of stones. That kills society as we know it and we go back to a feudal system. Been there, done that, don't want to go back. 2. Those with more assets and income receive much more of the good of society than those on skid row and, therefore, owe more in return. We should drop the idea of 'fairness' since that's probably way too subjective. We should adopt a results-based system which is somewhat less subject and, at least, measurable. When the middle class is unbelievably stressed, the rich are insanely rich and getting richer and the poor are starving, freezing or dying of treatable diseases then the results can be classified as very poor.