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
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
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?
I suppose there *could* be a neutral tax, but what would be the point?
It would
Dear Tom,
I hope I got your definition of neutral right in the last post. As I
indicated, I'd support a poll tax (so long as I'm an armchair intellectual
and not running for office, which with my abrasive personality would be a
joke anyway). I also support a flatter income tax. In fact I'd
In a message dated 1/16/03 11:57:03 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
AdmrlLocke wrote:
The farmer felt no compunction at all about complaining that while
under the income tax system he pays no tax, under a sales tax he'd pay
a hefty tax. He pays nothing and he thinks he's entitled to pay
On Wednesday, January 15, 2003 7:11 PM Fred Foldvary [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
To achieve neutrality, unrealized gains should be
taxed annually, and then we can forget about
capital gains.
But this assumes that taxes can be neutral. I would tend to agree with
Larry Sechrest here -- viz., there
Dear Dan,
I actually do agree, which is part of why when my conservative friends would
support a national sales tax instead of an income tax as though a national
sales tax were a panacea I'd just shake my head and tell them, there's no
such thing as an unburdensome tax. There's no
