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"
