Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In fact, didn't Adam Smith talk about fairness of burden?
We've had this discussion on C-D before. Smith addresses that concern specifically through the real estate tax...
"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion." - Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations
Notice how he discusses taxing the rich in proportion to their income - a flat tax - and endorses the property tax as a way to get the rich to then pay more than others in property taxes. The more valuable the home/property, the higher the tax one must pay. Very much like the system we have now.
Do you realize how much you would need to cut to get this 10% thing?? No roads, gut the Military, etc.
Fine..go 20% tax. We only need a military for defense.
Invading other countries is over and above what we fund our military to do.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.