franco b wrote:The wealthy should pay more proportionately than those of lower income because they have more to lose, and in that sense they consume more of publicly provided services such as national defense, police and fire protection, and even education. More dollars are being protected.
Income is not earned in a vacuum, but is the result of an environment that is conducive to the acquisition of wealth. That environment was not created by the wealthy but by the sacrifice of those who have gone before, some of whom were wealthy in establishing a form of government that all can share in. Would Bill Gates or Steve Jobs have done as well in any other country?
To carry equality even further, why should the owner of a 5 million dollar house pay more in real estate tax than the owner of a 200 thousand dollar house? Or why shouldn't everyone pay the same tax? Never mind proportional tax. It seems you favor proportional tax but object to incremental proportionality. If one is good then both are.
I think the real problem is the moral rot that pervades our government.
I think we are on the same page franco b.
A flat tax
means that the equality is in the rate of taxation. For example, the person earning 250,000 pays 10% of that income tax or $25000. The person earning $25,000 would pay 10% also or a tax of $2500. It is equal in rate and proportional to income. The rich person pays their proportionate fair share since they do consume more of the resources of this nation but the poor person carries the burden of a tax on his basic sustenance which is inordinately high.
The tax system we have now is called a progressive tax
. Incomes are not treated equally by applying the same rate, they have rates that vary directly with increasing levels of income. For example, the first person in the first example might pay 20% of his 250,000 income or $50000 while the second person might be paying 10% of their $25000 income or only 2500. A person earning less than a certain level of sustenance will have zero or negative tax. The rate of taxation is not equal between the taxpayers nor is it proportional to income. In other words, while the lower incomes have their survival needs considered before taxing their income, the rich are penalized for their high contributions to this nation.
Personally I don't like either tax
. I think the fairest tax
would consider the basic level of sustenance for individuals and families of various sizes and taking into account individual conditions (like age and disability) and exempt that portion of their total income. Above that amount, which might be in the range of 20,000 for an individual; 50,000 for a family of three, a flat tax of 10% of all net income should be the maximum tax and no other deductions should be allowed.
I also think that there should be a nominal minimum tax
for all able-bodied adult individuals regardless of income level so that everyone, as president Obama likes to say, has "skin in the game". Something on the order of perhaps $300/yr minimum no matter who you are. I also think that it must be paid in cold hard cash, in person, at your local post office or national bank so that everyone is a taxpayer who feels the burden. Upon payment you get your "I'm a US taxpayer" card validated thus entitling you to federal services based on need. Otherwise, No tickee, no washee, no exceptions.