Oh good heavens help us...

[kellinator]

The latest idea from Herr Shrub: Let's get rid of the income tax and replace it with a national sales tax.

This is the worst idea I've heard from the Idiot-in-Chief since... oh, who's counting?

I don't know a lot about economics, but I come from Tennessee, home of one of the highest sales taxes in the nation (including on food, and yes I do mean groceries). And sales taxes are definitely regressive.

Do the math. Say a person needs x amount of food to survive, taxed at 8%. For Bill Gates that tax is nothing; for the average middle-class American it's an 8% jump in the food bill. Talk about your cost of living increase...

I guess this is his way of saying he doesn't think he's put enough of the tax burden on the middle and lower class.

And if this post pisses you off, I don't give a fuck.

EDIT: Excellent article from resipsaloquitor:
http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/11/news/economy/election_tax/index.htm?cnn=yes

Comments

[kelliecoo.livejournal.com]

I am so pissed off at you right now, I could spit. Ha, ha, just kidding. A national sales tax is a stupid idea if it included basic essentials like food, gas (we are already taxed on that), etc. The stuff that everyone needs to survive...But if the big products we purchase were nationally taxed that would be awesome because then you know the guy in the Bentley is paying way more tax than the guy in the Hyundai. The IRS sucks, when you get married, your tax burden becomes horrendous. I used to get money back every year before marriage, now we owe about $4k and we take out more than the IRS recommends for our individual salaries.

[jphthebachelor.livejournal.com]

I have a problem with this Bentley argument. The amount that the Bentley driver pays in tax is strictly speaking larger, but actually accounts for a much smaller amount of his total income. So the tax burden on the Hyundai driver is considerably greater. That's what makes the tax unfair and regressive.

[kelliecoo.livejournal.com]

Oh man, I thought my argument was pretty good. :) When I lived in Britain, I loved the way they taxed. You never saw the money taken out and never had to do paperwork. So much nicer than our IRS.

[dwivian]

But, taxing income is inherently flawed -- income has NO MEANING. If you make $1M a year, but spend only $10k, you are taxed less, but the money you have isn't doing you any good. Money ONLY has value when spent. Taxing at the point of spending inherently equal, and her argument holds. Or, to be fair, how do you **KNOW** the Bentley driver has more income? Maybe it's Bill Gates buying a Hyundai because he loves the car, and a limo service (running nearly NO profit from location) buying the Bentley....

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

Not sure I'm understanding everyone on this particular issue but your argument makes no sense. If tax is levied at a strict percentage, then the burden is the same on everyone (assuming, of course, they really are talking about an after-essentials FLAT tax)

No matter what you make, 15% is 15%.

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

Oh wait, I see, you're talking about a flat tax on spending, not income. Now it all makes sense. OTOH, I'd have to agree with Dwiv, for many reasons.