[extropy-chat] Income Tax

[David Lubkin]

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>When each state is responsible for collecting the property taxes to
>send to DC, then each state is essentially making a 'charitable
>donation' to the federal government, and theoretically could find
>someplace else to put their money if it doesn't stay within its limits.
>
>It is always advantageous to maneuver one sovereign power to face off
>against another. Its more of a fair fight than uncle sugar sending the
>storm troopers to squash each individual, one at a time.

You have a good point. But why make property tax the mechanism nationwide?

Why not take the federal budget, calculate the cost per citizen, and bill 
each state for their share based on that state's population? Leave it to 
the state to chose whatever funding mechanism they like to obtain those 
funds. States already do this for their own budgets, allowing 52+ 
experiments and a direct competition between them for citizens and businesses.

As for the funding load on each individual, I would prefer fee-for-service 
-- you pay for what you use.

I would settle for a *true* flat tax. Not the usurpation of the plain 
meaning of the phrase. A flat rate is not a flat tax. Take the budget B, 
divide by the number of citizens C. You owe B/C.

When I buy a Plextor PX-712SA, a bag of potatoes, or a movie ticket, I pay 
the same price and get the same product as anyone else. Why do libertarians 
and conservatives concede the socialist premise of charging more?

There is, of course, a problem in practice today. Many people don't have 
B/C. But the answer to that begins with dramatically reducing B -- perhaps 
spurred by outrage at  B/C -- not with finding someone else to soak.


-- David.