XPost: az.general, az.politics   
   From: lesliesethhammond@yahoo.com   
      
   "mrmcafee" <"(mrmcafee)nospam"@cox.net> wrote in message   
   news:OyL2m.621$dd4.491@newsfe10.iad...   
   > Phxbrd wrote:   
   >>> Yeah, but you're nuts.   
   >>>   
   >>> What matters isn't what percentage you pay, it's how much you have left   
   >>> over after you pay. The pain burden needs to be equitable, not the   
   >>> actual tax burden. The top 10 percenters have PLENTY left over even if   
   >>> that pay up to 40% of their adjusted gross. That's not true for the   
   >>> other 90 percenters.   
   >>>   
   >>> Oh, those "loopholes" and deductions you complain about? They are a very   
   >>> effective tool of the government's to influence the economy. Like for   
   >>> example helping a new industry get established by offering people a tax   
   >>> credit for a portion of what they spend on it. Like for solar energy for   
   >>> example.   
   >>>   
   >>> But you claim to be a Libertarian, so we understand. You're just nuts,   
   >>> that's all.   
   >>   
   >> "Flat tax" seems to involve a complexity that your so-called brain can't   
   >> encompass.   
   >>   
   >> I'll try to keep this as simple as I possibly can(dumb it down):  A   
   >> simple flat tax might prove to be as low as, oh, let's say 5%.  With me   
   >> so far? (That's 1% times 5).   
   >   
   >   
   > The legislature was proposing less than 3%. Just enough to keep the jails   
   > open and the cops on the road.   
   >   
   >   
   >>  In practice, someone earning 100K per year would pay $5,000.00 in flat   
   >> tax.  That leaves them the complement of $95,000.00 untaxed.  Get it?   
   >> Now let's consider someone as poor-ass as you.  If you somehow managed to   
   >> have gross earning of a whole 10K all by yourself, you'd pay a measly   
   >> $500.00.  See how that works?  Pay attention now as I sum this up for   
   >> you:  Each of you will have paid the same percentage of your income!   
   >> Isn't that amazing?  See how simple and equitable a flat tax could be?   
   >   
   >   
   > Simple? Yes. Even you could figure your own tax. Whether or not you could   
   > address the envelope properly to get it to the DOR is another matter.   
   >   
   > The question is, will that $500.00 be missed more of less than the   
   > $5000.00 your upper middle class tax payer had to cough up? Will that   
   > $1,000,000.00 paid up by the wealthy developer in Paradise Valley be   
   > missed as much as the $500.00 will be? After all, the wealthy developer   
   > has $19,000,000 more with which to salve his wounds. The guy that paid   
   > $500.00 just has $9,500. That's not enough to live on properly. That   
   > $500.00 represents 2 months worth of beans and rice.   
   >   
   >   
   >   (A   
   >> sliding scale of tax liability is built right in!)   
   >   
   >   
   > But it is not proportionate to the "value" of the taxes paid by each   
   > group. What has to be equitable isn't the tax amount paid, nor even the   
   > tax percentage but the tax "pain".   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >> Now say this back to me to prove you understood the simple concept, but   
   >> if you can't, I'll understand...   
   >   
   >   
   > No one expects you to understand the progressive income tax theory. You're   
   > a Libertarian after all.   
   >>   
      
   I give up.  Your bumbling stupidity is too profound.  I don't know how you   
   find your way out of bed in the morning.   
      
   Ask the first person you see to explain the simple concept of "A sliding   
   scale of tax liability is built right in!".   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)