On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 23:40:17 +0000 (UTC),
(Larry W) wrote:

In article ,
Pete C. wrote:
...snipped...
... The thing is, what legal, constitutional,
moral, etc. justification do you have for taxing some people at a higher
rate just because they have deep pockets? Why should one person pay
$0.50 of every dollar they earn while someone else only pays $0.15 of
every dollar they earn? No rational person can be in favor of anything
but a single flat tax on all income from all sources as being fair to
everyone.

The answers to those 2 questions are so numerous and readily available I
wouldn't even attempt to ist them here. And the final sentence would
be just as valid if the words "anything but" were deleted.


"So brilliant, yet so corrupt, which, like a rotten mackerel by
moonlight, shines and stinks."
(John Randolph about Henry Clay)

When you get close enough to that "flat tax," you'll smell something.
He's already cut out exemptions for "poverty level" income.
That "poverty level" would quickly become a moving target.
Taxation ultimately gets decided by voters.
Got nothing to do with simple "pie in the sky" theories.
It's as complex as society itself.
Nothing wrong with tax code simplification if you can get by the
special interests.
Who gets voted into office sets tax policy.
The rest lobby them for their self-interests, or pound sand.
Flat-taxers should vote for Ron Paul or Newt Gingrich, and Republican
congressmen who will support their agenda.
Simple as that.
If you win, you get a flat tax.
If you lose, you pound sand.
That's all assuming the politicians aren't lying to you.
Haha.

--Vic