On Sep 23, 8:47*pm, Hawke wrote:


Why is it that no one but you has taken exception to Froomkin? Could it
be that you don't understand it? You are taking a much larger percentage
of someone's income when they are poor than when they are rich when the
tax rate is the same. Regressive taxes take less from those who make
more. You don't get it?

I also take exception to Froomkin.

You are not taking a much larger percentage of someone's income when
they are poor with a proportional tax. If the proportional tax
system has a threshold at which the tax starts, then you are taking a
smaller percentage of a poor persons income.

For example say there is no tax on the first $20,000 of income and
then there is a flat 10% tax. A poor person that makes say $ 30,000 a
year would pay 10% of $10,000 or $1000. A rich person that makes
$100,000 a year would pay 10% of $80,000 or $8,000 . So the poor
person would pay 3.3 % in taxes and the rich person would pay 8 % in
taxes.

So there it is in black and white numbers. Proof that you are wrong.


Dan



Hawke