Let us set aside the ethical issues concerning progressive taxation, 
and consider the policy-driven objectives.  Progressive taxes are 
meant as a way not to punish the rich, per se, but force them to aid 
people in the lower tax brackets.  I am wondering, does it have in 
fact the opposite effect?

Certainly, citizenry on the lower end of the market spectrum benefit 
significantly in a financial sense with progressive taxation.  
However, are they losing their political clout?  Since the rich 
contribute more per capita to the government chest, do they have 
more influence on (or simply more interest in) public policy and 
legislation than they would if there were a flat tax, or a flat fee?

>From my limited experience, most tax protesters/activists are middle 
class (I have not numbers to support this observation).  I do not 
see too many of the wealthy step up to bat against high tax rates.  
Do they accept money in government coffers as currency for the 
influential, i.e. limousine liberalism at its worst?

Sourav Mandal


------------------------------------------------------------
Sourav K. Mandal

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Department of Physics
http://web.mit.edu/smandal/www/

"In enforcing a truth we need severity rather than
efflorescence of language. We must be simple, 
precise, terse."

                      -- Edgar Allan Poe, 
                         "The Poetic Principle"

        



------------------------------------------------------------
Sourav K. Mandal

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Department of Physics
http://web.mit.edu/smandal/www/

"In enforcing a truth we need severity rather than
efflorescence of language. We must be simple, 
precise, terse."

                      -- Edgar Allan Poe, 
                         "The Poetic Principle"

        


Reply via email to