🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <jcwagner-1906961202440001@canberra-12.slip.uiuc.edu> jcwagner@uiuc.edu (Jon Wagner) writes:

>> Up with the consumption tax.

>And down with the poor.  Didn't you learn any normative economics in
>preparing for law school.

Non sequiter.

While a flat, exemptionless consumption tax may be regressive
with respect to income (while, obviously flat with respect
to consumption), you are making quite an assumption.

A consumption tax which exempts, say, groceries, rent, and
purchase of primary residence would _greatly_ favor the poor
who spend most of their income on those very things.

Then again, as soon as you open the discussion to listing
exemptions to the tax, you start down the path towards
the politically twisted tax we have now with its absurdly
complicated rules for exemption.

I would have to say the only exemptions I would permit
would be, perhaps, the first $500/mo of rent and plain,
uncooked dry beans and rice.  The twinkie lobby would
oppose me...

--D
-- 
dmeyers@panix.com

"Any technology distinguishable from magic
 is insufficiently advanced."