To Tom Grey (and others) 2 points:
1: why not retain land tax as a local tax, as this would ensure tax- payers the possibility of voting with ther feet, end thus ensure some degree of fiscal competition between neigbouring counties / municipalities? 2: I believe Austrain Economic Theory does noit regard inflation as a neutral tax, as one of it's main beliefs is that the earlier you get your hands on new money, the more you benefit - and vice-versa. I don't know whether this holds true for constant (that is: expected) inflation as you are descibing as well - anyone? Jacob Braestrup Danish Taxpayers Association > Dan, > even more than direct/indirect, you need to specify what is "neutral". > Given democracy, one (adult) person, one vote, a strong case can be made > for a "neutral" poll tax. > Of course it is not "progressive" like most income taxes. Flat rate > taxes, sales/VAT taxes, even land taxes, affect some more than others. > > My own preferences are more towards a flat(er) tax, with a large (poverty > level) deduction, and rates tending down (to zero?); a land tax, split > between local, state, and federal (1/3 each? 50-25-25?); and ever increasing > taxes on pollution. I am constantly annoyed at the greens wanting huge > regulation but unwilling to support higher pollution taxes. > Um, to get rid of the last 5% of income taxes, I'd even support deficit spending > printing money (inflation, another fairly "neutral" tax, > of about 2-3% per year). > > But of the course the MAIN problem is on the benfit side -- so many voters > want, claim, demand, and only-vote-for those politicos who offer their > favorite benefits. The demand for benefits drives the demand for tax > revenue. > > And the coming (2020) Social Security baby boomer elephant-sized funding gap > is gonna be a HUGE increase in benefit demand. > Europe is even more vulnerable than the US or the UK. > Sigh. "What is to be done?" (someone said that... I know, what's is name > the commie!) > > Tom Grey > > > > But this assumes that taxes can be neutral. I would tend to > > agree with > > Larry Sechrest here -- viz., there are no neutral taxes. (Sechrest's > > position is laid out in his "Rand, Anarchy, and Taxes" in _The Journal > > of Ayn Rand Studies_ 1(2).) > > > > Do any of you agree? > > > > Cheers! > > > > Dan > > http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/ > > > > > > > > -- NeoMail - Webmail
