Real economic conservatives want to END the redistribution of wealth that the progressive income tax attempts to accomplish.
The flat tax is one answer to that.
The choice between Rudy and Hillary is: Liberal or Liberal-er
So let us assume the flat tax was put in place Jeff, and taxes due where each individual were equal percentages and in a more fair manner according to these economists...
This makes the wealthiest in our country "get a huge tax BREAK" from where they were and this makes the mid middle class and those below that point in our country "GET A HUGE TAX INCREASE" from what they were paying in taxes.
If 2/3's of our economy is "the consumer", then how will taxing 80% of the American populous MORE, while taxing the wealthiest 20% less, actually compensate for the drop in consumer spending that you will see because 80% of the consumers will have less of their own money in their own pockets to spend in the market place?
A Flat tax is pushed by the wealthiest so that they can get a tax cut and they are making those with MUCH LESS THAN THEM carry much more of the TAX BURDEN.
Sometimes I wonder if the way we had it in the old days, where the middle class and the lower class did not have to pay income tax and the wealthiest only had to pay...might actually have been the "right" way to go....
The reason I propose this is because IF only the wealthiest and the smartest were paying taxes then you can be DAMNED SURE that the pressure from these influential and politically savvy people, would suppress congress and keep them from not wasting money....
they would "keep" the gvt small by keeping the spending down and would have the "say so" with their pocket book influence.
Of course, I really don't want to go back to the days of 90% taxes on the top's excesses....
The complicated income tax structure that we have that is at least 10 yards high in paperwork and rules with all kinds of exceptions and deductions and loopholes, is THIS complicated
because of the wealthiest and their influence on the political legislators....they've tried to baffle us with their bullshit basically, imo.
And NOW, they can't have another 10 yards high of rules to make it even less of a burden on them so NOW they want a flat tax, to reduce their taxes even more. (If only they spent their influential time and money on getting Congress to not spend money like drunken sailors, they seem to have given up on that....
I think there should be a FLAT TAX (Flat meaning no deductions and not of equal amounts), a "progressive" flat tax...
No deductions, no loopholes... what so ever allowed,
no huge IRS overhead needed!
Some thing like:
$0-20k... 0%
$20k-50k 5%
$50-100k 10%
$100k-$1M 15%
$1M -$10M 20%
$10M & above 25%
(Warren Buffet did say he only paid 17% in taxes last year....While his secretary had to pay 30% in taxes...?)
The other thing that has to be considered in all of this is Social Security taxes, do they get incorporated in with income taxes, so not to have a separate tax?
I think this is a must at this point...
Because hundreds of billions if not over a trillion of Social Security surplus funds have been spent for general spending, used for purposes other than social security of which income taxes should have been collected to pay for these things...
those making over $95 k do not pay social security taxes for their money earned over that amount, making Social security taxes extremely regressive, a burden on those in the middle or on to the poorest, while eliviating it from the wealthiest is truely not fair imo.
Especially since the SS surplus monies were used to pay for things that their income taxes should have picked up the tab for...?
Social Security has to be considered in any new reforms of the income tax structure...fur sure! imo
care
.
