4 ms·

A flat tax would be more regressive than a progressive tax scheme - it's a spectrum. > That's about as equal and fair as you can get Equal in terms of % of in

by danans 7y ago

A flat tax would be more regressive than a progressive tax scheme - it's a spectrum. > That's about as equal and fair as you can get Equal in terms of % of income paid: yes, fair: no way. Your statement makes the assumption that the opportunities to gain higher income are equally and fairly distributed, which they are manifestly not.

jxramos 7y ago
Actually I just tried to tease out a definition from the investopedia article, which I was mislead reading the sales tax example which has a fixed amount (the price of some taxable goods) which holds no sliding scale based on income. The regression appears to be strictly around the idea of burden to the individual and how much disposable income they get left with. Looking at the wikipedia article they claim that flat tax lies between a regressive and progressive tax. > The opposite of a regressive tax is a progressive tax, in which the average tax rate increases as the amount subject to taxation rises. In between is a flat or proportional tax, where the tax rate is fixed as the amount subject to taxation increases. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_tax Where in my statement does the assumption of equal income mobility pop up? Another hit mentions a proportional tax as a middle ground between regressive and progressive gradients. The central point is how things are treated relative to income. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042415/what-are-differences-between-regressive-proportional-and-progressive-taxes.asp https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042415/what-are-dif...
- danans 7y ago
  > Where in my statement does the assumption of equal income mobility pop up? You wrote: > [A flat tax is] about as equal and fair as you can get I disagree about the fair part, but we likely have different ideas about what fair means in this context. For me, equal opportunity to income mobility is part of what fair means.

by danans 7y ago

jxramos 7y ago

Actually I just tried to tease out a definition from the investopedia article, which I was mislead reading the sales tax example which has a fixed amount (the price of some taxable goods) which holds no sliding scale based on income. The regression appears to be strictly around the idea of burden to the individual and how much disposable income they get left with. Looking at the wikipedia article they claim that flat tax lies between a regressive and progressive tax. > The opposite of a regressive tax is a progressive tax, in which the average tax rate increases as the amount subject to taxation rises. In between is a flat or proportional tax, where the tax rate is fixed as the amount subject to taxation increases. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_tax Where in my statement does the assumption of equal income mobility pop up? Another hit mentions a proportional tax as a middle ground between regressive and progressive gradients. The central point is how things are treated relative to income. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042415/what-are-differences-between-regressive-proportional-and-progressive-taxes.asp https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042415/what-are-dif...

danans 7y ago
> Where in my statement does the assumption of equal income mobility pop up? You wrote: > [A flat tax is] about as equal and fair as you can get I disagree about the fair part, but we likely have different ideas about what fair means in this context. For me, equal opportunity to income mobility is part of what fair means.