The idea of some sort of flat tax that applies equally to all is attractive. Up to a point. It does not take into consideration that those who have most benefited from and in our system owe the country more, even proportionally, than the rest, but I’m willing to let that go. But the so-called Fair Tax is anything but, though it puts on a good show. Only the purchase of new items, not second-hand items, would be taxed under this proposal. Thus no tax would be paid when you purchase land (which is always second hand), a classic car or other antiques, Picassos, or Rembrandts, old coins, etc. Nor anything bought outside the country, while on your foreign vacations, or mail-ordered from abroad. (I get lots of books from England.) If you make all your money in the United States, but spend most of it on and in your home in the Bermuda, you won’t pay any taxes. So guess who would best be able to avoid the Fair Tax? But let’s suppose your could fix that. What about payroll taxes like Medicare and Social Security? The big earners pay a smaller percentage than the rest of us, so they are regressive taxes. So of course, we’d have to pay those things out of general revenue. Okay, that works. Do you think that it is unfair that the rich should pay taxes at a higher rate than the middle class? Okay! How about this: a flat tax on each person’s net worth. All you property, from personal possessions to investments, to real estate. One simple rate for all. If you make money but spend it just as fast, so that you don’t actually own anything, then you wouldn’t pay much, but then at least you would be putting the money back into the global economy somewhere, spending it all on services. Of course, I know you’re not really serious about any of this. Harlequin is a name denoting a crazy clown, a court jester. I’m sure you must really be someone very different from the clown and jester you pretend to be.
The idea of some sort of flat tax that applies equally to all is attractive. Up to a point. It does not take into consideration that those who have most benefited from and in our system owe the country more, even proportionally, than the rest, but I’m willing to let that go. But the so-called Fair Tax is anything but, though it puts on a good show. Only the purchase of new items, not second-hand items, would be taxed under this proposal. Thus no tax would be paid when you purchase land (which is always second hand), a classic car or other antiques, Picassos, or Rembrandts, old coins, etc. Nor anything bought outside the country, while on your foreign vacations, or mail-ordered from abroad. (I get lots of books from England.) If you make all your money in the United States, but spend most of it on and in your home in the Bermuda, you won’t pay any taxes. So guess who would best be able to avoid the Fair Tax? But let’s suppose your could fix that. What about payroll taxes like Medicare and Social Security? The big earners pay a smaller percentage than the rest of us, so they are regressive taxes. So of course, we’d have to pay those things out of general revenue. Okay, that works. Do you think that it is unfair that the rich should pay taxes at a higher rate than the middle class? Okay! How about this: a flat tax on each person’s net worth. All you property, from personal possessions to investments, to real estate. One simple rate for all. If you make money but spend it just as fast, so that you don’t actually own anything, then you wouldn’t pay much, but then at least you would be putting the money back into the global economy somewhere, spending it all on services. Of course, I know you’re not really serious about any of this. Harlequin is a name denoting a crazy clown, a court jester. I’m sure you must really be someone very different from the clown and jester you pretend to be.