🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4grdq4$85f@netaxs.com> evansdb@netaxs.com@netaxs.com    (Dan Evans) writes:
>From: evansdb@netaxs.com@netaxs.com    (Dan Evans)
>Subject: Re: Abolish the Income Tax!!
>Date: 26 Feb 1996 04:43:48 GMT

>In <4grcs0$rk2@news.ios.com>, "Alan H. Peterson" <uscccn@haven.ios.com> writes:
>>In recent years, the growth rate of the United States economy has fallen 
>>below the historic pattern.  Budget deficits, continued growth of the 
>>National Dept and persistent, huge trade deficits are key warning 
>>signals. The income tax, which is anti-savings and anti-investment, and 
>>which adversely affects our international competitiveness, must be 
>>abolished.

>The largest economic growth in the history of the United States 
>occurred during the 1950s, when the top marginal income tax rate
>was 70%, or 90% with surcharges.  Furthermore, the GI Bill of 
>Rights subsidized the middle class with loans for home mortgages
>and college educations.

>Now, the top marginal income tax rate is 39% and the government
>subsidizes big corporations and the upper class.  As a result, the
>rich are getting richer and the poor and getting poorer.

>Draw your own conclusions.

I think you're oversimplifying.  First of all, the economy lags behind 
government action.  It may take a while for government to destroy
the habits of people to save an invest.
Secondly, the rates themselves don't necessarily indicate the
actual tax burden.   For many years, our tax burdens increased because
of "bracket creep" due to inflation.   Deductions have been removed.
Local taxes, especially sales taxes, have increased.
Thirdly, no one is being "subsidized"  unless, like the poor, they get
more value in government services than the taxes they pay in.
The value of national defense is approximately the same for everyone,
(excluding the pork barrel aspect of military spending)
but except for that, most Federal programs benefit either the poor or
certain favored industries such as agriculture.

-VT


>>Without increased 
>>economic growth, other problems, such as the decline in the quality of 
>>education and increased crime will not be solved.

>Agreed.  But why do you think that selling out to the moneyed 
>classes solves the problem?

What about the bureaucratic classes?  They're the ones with the power!

>Dan Evans ************************
>http://www.netaxs.com/~evansdb
>This is not a legal opinion unless     
>you agreed to pay for it. 
>**********************************