I think this would be in relation to your question.
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat and was for distribution of all wealth.
She felt deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican which she expressed openly. One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to higher taxes on the rich & the addition of more government welfare
programs. Based on the lectures that she had participated in and the occasional chat with a professor she felt that for years her father had obviously harbored an evil, even selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.
The self professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father.
He stopped her and asked her point blank, how she was doing in school. She answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain. That she studied all the time, never had time to go out and party like other people she knew.
She didn't even have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of spending all her time studying.
That she was taking a more difficult curriculum.
Her father listened and then asked, "How is your good friend Mary doing?"
She replied, "Mary is barely getting by." She continued, "She barely has a 2.0 GPA," adding, "and all she takes are easy classes and she never studies." "But Mary is so very popular on campus, college for her is a blast, she goes to all the parties all the time and very often doesn't even show up for classes because she is too hung over."
4 minutes ago
Her father then asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your 4.0 GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0." He continued, "That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."
The daughter visibly shocked by her father's suggestion angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I worked really hard for mine, I did without and Mary has done little or nothing, she played while I worked real hard!"
The father slowly smiled, winked and said,
"Welcome to the Republican Party"
2007-07-24 12:44:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The "Fair Tax" would be anything but fair if it is only a flat tax. Those on the lower economic scale are actually paying a larger share of their means because little or none of it is disposable or available for investment. - I also take exception to mark j's ignorant little homily that ignores so many of the realities that simple stories often do. I guess we are anything but born equal and if we have an advantage over someone else it is because we deserve it, right? I guess it's okay to externalize the damage and waste of bad policy at the taxpayer's expense and then tell those who are stuck with it that they deserve it because they are too inferior to resist. I'm so sick of conservatives touting individuality when they themselves are terrified of having to exist without an advantage over someone. They ignore all the taxpayer support both direct and indirect their corporations get and call it their own hard work. Will we ever stop this classism and embrace humanity's full potential? Nah. That wouldn't be "fair."
2007-07-24 20:05:52
·
answer #2
·
answered by WatchingEthosInFreefall 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
The FairTax Plan is a nonpartisan national grassroots campaign to replace the federal income tax system with a progressive national retail sales tax. It provides a "prebate" to ensure no American pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar federal revenue replacement and, through companion legislation, repeal of the 16th Amendment.
I am not sure that is the way to go because when a person would buy a major item such as a car or a home, would the "fair tax" be implemented? It may be worse than what we already have!
2007-07-24 19:34:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by Mary W 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
Well of course but it would never go through.
The rich would actually have to pay their taxes, and a lot of sleazy tax lawyers would have to find new clients and accountants would have find a new job.
It would probably save billions in tax compliance costs and encourage investment. For one, the taxes would penalize spending instead of earning. You want a tax break? Save your money.
This country is on the wrong side of the interest rate and the income tax only perpetuates class division and rule by the elite political class. Its time for a change!
Trust me Nick, if this was a bad thing for the working class (who is currently supporting the system) the politicians would be jumping over each other to get it passed. The current system is all about being rich enough to hire a lawyer to find the loophole and buying a politician to make sure that loophole exists and grows.
2007-07-24 19:33:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by freedom first 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
I wouldn't because it shifts more tax burden on to the middle class.
The "fair" tax, isn't that fair, a higher percentage of a middle class persons total earnings are spent on goods and services than are a very wealth persons, and since it's a consumption tax, you will be shifting further tax burden to the middle class.
2007-07-24 19:33:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Nick F 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
No income tax is fair. Anything else is just playing with words.
2007-07-24 19:50:43
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jose R 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
I've heard and I would support it. After all it does seem "fair."
2007-07-24 19:32:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
Yes, and yes.
PS I read the Boortz book.
2007-07-24 19:35:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
Yes, and yes.
2007-07-24 19:33:33
·
answer #9
·
answered by Beau R 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
sounds good to me.
2007-07-24 19:32:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋