Article View: pa.general
Article #73Re: Income tax repealed...maybe...
From: John Hensley
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 1996 00:00
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 1996 00:00
37 lines
3085 bytes
3085 bytes
Lyle Cox <lyle@frii.com> wrote: >Any one ever stop to think that the poor (I'm one of them) also tend to >use a higher percentage of the government's resources. Maybe we should >pay a higher percentage of our money in taxes. I disagree with your logic. You're saying that we should make the poor pay a higher percentage of their income for taxes than the rest of the population and then give it back to them in goverment services. This makes no sense to me because the overhead of operating the goverment services. Just let the people keep the money rather than collect it from them, pay billions of dollars in administration costs and then give it back to them. I don't see a bright spot to this plan. >I make the point that my >necessities of life are very much different than someone else's >necessities. To some beer and cigarettes are necessary. [Beer I agree >with :) ]To others they would be a luxury. The only people capable of >making that decision are the people buying the items. Keep it simple. >Sales tax with no exemptions, no deductions!!!! There is a definable minimum that it takes for a reasonably expected standard of living. If someone makes this much and would rather spend their money on beer or other luxuries rather than electricty and water, this is not my nor your business. This person should pay tax on all money earned that is above the defined required standard of living. If they waste what they have they earn they get nothing from the goverment because they are above the level defined as needing goverment assistance. People who receive goverment assistance should receive it in a form that can't be converted to wastefull items other than necessities. Recent studies reported the week before last show that a sales tax not a fair method of taxation and does not fit the standard of taxation set forth by the founding fathers of our country. A flat tax with no exemptions, on everything over a predefined minimum necessary for a reasonable standard of living, is a much fairer method of taxation. ..John
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4rrei1$cn3@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<4q7so3$ul@nntpa.cb.lucent.com> <31D8ADE1.4B7D@frii.com> <4rglcq$kth@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> <tporczykDu2y2z.FDz@netcom.com> <4rlqah$gps@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> <31E086A8.743C@frii.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 101acf,f2c364be31848f75 X-Google-Attributes: gid101acf,public X-Google-Thread: f824f,f2c364be31848f75 X-Google-Attributes: gidf824f,public X-Google-Thread: 1073ca,f2c364be31848f75 X-Google-Attributes: gid1073ca,public X-Google-Thread: f6cc7,f2c364be31848f75 X-Google-Attributes: gidf6cc7,public From: John Hensley <johnhe@worldnet.att.net> Subject: Re: Income tax repealed...maybe... Date: 1996/07/08 Message-ID: <4rrei1$cn3@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> X-Deja-AN: 167215878 references: <4q7so3$ul@nntpa.cb.lucent.com> <31D8ADE1.4B7D@frii.com> <4rglcq$kth@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> <tporczykDu2y2z.FDz@netcom.com> <4rlqah$gps@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net> <31E086A8.743C@frii.com> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: SmartSoft mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: pa.general,co.general,triangle.general,ba.general x-mailer: Mozilla 1.22ATT (Windows; U; 16bit)