View Single Post
Old
03-09-2011, 05:34 PM
  #20
deanwormer
Registered User
 
deanwormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Nashville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,292
vCash: 437
Quote:
Originally Posted by lstcyr View Post
I understand what you're saying but consider that the sales tax is as high as it is because there is no income tax. An income tax COULD allow a lower sales tax with the net result you might pay the same or less. (I would bet less unless you're one of the top 2% in a progressive income tax.).
The problem I see with this approach is the goal of taxation, at any level, simply, is to raise revenue for the government to pay for necessary services.

It's not to create the maximum amount of revenue. It's not to create some type of transfer of wealth. I struggle to understand how it's more equitable to create a system that not only takes more from those that earn a higher income (those that can "afford" to payer higher taxes), but actually shifts the RESPONSIBILITY of some citizens to contribute for the services and benefits they receive to other citizens?

Our sales tax is a pretty simplistic way to tax consumption - it can be done in a much more sophisticated way that reduces the inherent rate burden on lower earning individuals and still maintain the integrity of all contributing and being taxed based on decision you make (consumption), not on the results of your contributions to society (income).

deanwormer is offline   Reply With Quote