Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Roger
Can you prove it?
|
Actually, I was referencing the results of the U.S. Treasury study, and you responded that:
“
I believe if you look at the math, you will see that you are wrong when you say the poor and middle class would pay more proportionally.”
Can
YOU “prove” it ?
Quote:
|
The Treasury Department has a vested interest in keeping the current system.
|
A) But it is not limited to the Treasury Department.
B) It was the Reagan administration’s Treasury Department, so I seriously doubt they would have a “vested interest in keeping the current system”, since after they abandoned the 'Flat Tax', they then went on to implement a radically different tax scheme that failed rather dramatically.
Quote:
|
If it was a Flat Tax, there wouldn't be a need for most of the people who work at the Treasury Department.
|
Untrue.
The complexities of the current system, of deciding what is and what is not income – what is and what is not exempt, would remain with a ‘Flat Tax’.
Quote:
|
You are right about the amount of income spent on necessities by the classes. That does not mean the tax is proportional, the tax would still be a flat percentage.
|
Never claimed the "tax is proportional", but what people PAY in taxes would be proportional to their income. Hence, horribly unfair.
#