SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: halfscot who wrote (9029)11/16/1998 8:08:00 AM
From: Axxel  Respond to of 13994
 
The poor, if they cannot pay the flat tax, could become slaves. Probably an idea whose time has not come.



To: halfscot who wrote (9029)11/16/1998 11:58:00 PM
From: jbe  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 13994
 
halfscot, what was under discussion was a flat tax on consumption -- i.e., a national sales tax -- not a flat income tax.

However, I gather the leading proposals for a national sales tax do provide for rebates for low-income people. Even then, critics of such proposals claim that the most tax relief would go to the very wealthy:

If households are classified by annual income, the sales tax is sharply
regressive. Under the AFT proposal, taxes would rise for households in the
bottom 90 percent of the income distribution, while households in the top 1
percent would receive an average tax cut of over $75,000. If households
are classified by consumption level, a somewhat different pattern
emerges. Households in the bottom two-thirds of the distribution would pay
less than currently, households in the top third would pay more. Still,
households at the very top would pay much less, again receiving a tax cut
of about $75,000. There appears to be little sound motivation for heaping
huge tax cuts on precisely the groups whose income and wealth have
benefitted the most from recent events, and raising burdens significantly
on others.


brook.edu