View Single Post
Unread 11 Nov 2005, 20:39   #32
Nodrog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 8,476
Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Nodrog has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: So if you had to choose...

Quote:
Originally Posted by acropolis
and the phrase 'flat tax' manages to talk about radically altering the tax system without answering any relevant question about what the changes would actually mean. using a non-ideal 'flat tax' as you describe, you could: raise taxes on the poor, lower them on the rich. raise taxes on the rich, lower them on the poor. or: raise taxes on the middle class, and lower them on the rich and the poor.
Well, I would personally support a one-rate income tax that applies equally to everyone, with no exemptions or tax-free earning floors for people on low incomes. Obviously this isnt going to happen since in order to maintain current levels of public spending while eliminating the higher rate of income tax, the lower rate would have to be drastically increased. This would be political suicide since even the most ardent fans of things like the NHS and social security tone their cheerleading down when faced with the prospect of actually having to pay for them out their own pocket. I'm not sure what exactly David Cameron proposed, but I imagine it would involve enough exemptions and pandering that the 'average family' didnt end up paying more taxes overall (and as dda said, it could even increase the tax burden on the rich, although thats unlikely given his political leanings).
Nodrog is offline   Reply With Quote