My personal problem with regressive policies is not that it effects peoples quality of life, rather that it affects the lives of their children. People that did

My personal problem with regressive policies is not that it effects peoples quality of life, rather that it affects the lives of their children. People that did not have a choice about which family they are born into. Consider my own personal story. I come from an upper-middle class family. During high school I wasn't particularly motivated to excel academically and as a consequence didn't get particularly good grades in courses that I should have if I had invested the appropriate time and effort into studying. My parents response to this situation was to hire a tutor and force me to sit down with said tutor and study several hours a week. As a consequence I ended up getting better grades than I should have simply because my parents had the disposable income to spend on tutors. People from disadvantaged backgrounds do not get this same benefit. As a consequence I go on to university and end up getting a higher position on the totem pole because of my parents wealth. The kid who comes from a disadvantaged background and is in the same academic position as me does not get that kind of second chance. >The next closest "fair" thing to me is a retail sales tax, provided that everyone is provided a stipend to cover the tax paid on basic living expenses. Consumption taxes are regressive because they penalize the spenders. Bill Gates doesn't spend nearly as much money as he earns and as such pays a lower effective tax rate than someone who makes $30,000 a year and spends it all to support their family.