4 ms·
A relatively high 'flat tax' might be palatable to the electorate as long as the first $85,000, give or take, was completely tax-free. People would only have to
by nerdsniper 9mo ago
A relatively high 'flat tax' might be palatable to the electorate as long as the first $85,000, give or take, was completely tax-free. People would only have to contribute once their own needs are met and they actually have something left over to contribute.
- toomuchtodo 9mo agoThat’s progressive taxes. Consider that roughly the bottom 60% of Americans have no federal income tax liability, simply because they do not make enough. That 60% cannot meet their basic needs on their incomes, very roughly speaking. Any increase of taxes on them would be regressive.
- nerdsniper 9mo agoIndeed. I should rephrase that I think it would be feasible to use propaganda/marketing to redefine what a "flat tax" is, and make the most popular definition one where the basic living wage is exempt and the "flat tax" only applies to the amount over that. Through that confusion of language, it might then manage to be popular with both libertarians and progressives.
- toomuchtodo 9mo agoReasonable.
- seanmcdirmid 9mo agoIt’s kind of progressive. Depends on how high the deductible is, it is definitely semi progressive. Tax bands would still be more progressive, it’s why someone making $50k is paying more state income tax in Alabama than they would in California.