[Dialogue] The Life of Joe Republican

[David L. Thomas]

> Terry is right (see below), the VAT should not be substituted for the
income tax as the
> Bush administration would like, but for the FICA tax.
>
> Bush wants to reduce the income tax, especially for the rich.  But the
> justification for the income tax is that it corrects for market
> over-allocation of income to the rich.  Our income tax should be changed
to
> a simpler flat tax on income with a deduction equal to the median income
and
> the rate set to produce the same revenue as the present tax.
>
> A 45% tax might result on all family income over $50,000.  This would be
> simpler and quite progressive.  If your income is $50,000, you pay no tax.
> If $100,000, you pay 22.5% = $22,500.  If $200,000, you pay 33.75% =
> $67,500.  If $1 million, you pay 42.75% = $427,500
>
> Any deductions should be capped by an alternative minimum income tax.
Dave Thomas
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Terry Bergdall" <bergdall2 at usa.net>
> To: <DavThom at worldnet.att.net>
> Sent: Monday, November 22, 2004 8:11 AM
> Subject: Fwd: Re: [Dialogue] The Life of Joe Republican
> >
> > >We should substitute a VAT tax for our FICA tax, which discourages
> > >employment.  We could still measure earnings to allocate social
> > >security.  Dave Thomas
> >
> > The problem with a VAT in the US is that the Bush Administration and
other
> > tax "reformers" seem to be more inclined to substitute it for the income
> > tax than FICA tax.
> >
> > Terry
> >
>