Quote:
Originally Posted by ezkcdude
When you go to the cash register, the tax is 30%. That's how people will calculate it in their heads, so that's what matters.
|
*headdesk* Except that it's a replacement for the income tax, and in comparing how much people will have in-pocket in comparison to *that*, that's what matters. This isn't rocket science. That's why there large discussions on that site about inclusive vs. exclusive, why this has to be talked about in both terms, what they mean, what their ramifications are, etc. You can't just pick one and say all taxes have to be discussed that way, because we don't *now*.
Quote:
|
I actually went through their calculator. It turns out I would save a hell of a lot of money according to the flat tax. Does that make me want to support it? Hell no. It's obvious that people like me who can afford to invest (not taxed), save (not taxed) will benefit greatly. If I'm making out like a bandit, I can only imagine what rich folks would gain. It's ridiculous.
|
I doubt your purchase patterns are the same as the rich.
If your entire judgement of a tax is based on how badly it soaks the rich, then I can't help you. I'm more interested in establishing a revenue collection system that is efficient, progressive, fulfills the monetary needs of the government, and doesn't have the opaqueness and loopholes we have now.