new.morning wrote:
> --- In [email protected], Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
>> new.morning wrote:
>>     
>>> Flat Tax of (about) 17%. Starting at income above $30,000 for singles,
>>> $50,00 for families.  Or whatever above that which keeps the flat tax
>>> from being regressive -- and balances the books.
>>>       
>> So how would you handle the mortgage interest deduction?
>>
>>     
>
>
> Eliminate it. Along with deductions for home equity loans (what a
> scam). Eliminate all deductions. As well taxes on capital gains,
> interest and dividends.
>
> Unless you are living in a 1,000,000 home, the so called "rich" are
> gaining MUCH more from the mortgage deduction than you (the average
> reader) are.
>   
Well after the deduction I pay a helluva lot less in income taxes than I 
would otherwise.  Of course for me and many that would come out in the 
wash if you were only taxed for income over $50K.   A lot of Americans 
could not afford their houses without that break.  That is why the 
Realtor groups lobby against any flat tax proposals.

> Even a two tier tax would be fine in my book. No taxes up to 50,000,
> 10% for 50,001-100,000, 18% after that. With no deductions and no
> (double) 
> taxation on savings in whatever form).
I'm all for flat taxes or a much more simplified tax system as I'm way 
too artsy and therefore right brained to be doing accounting.  So I hate 
even doing the worksheets for my tax returns.  However I think your plan 
would lead to those who do pay taxes thinking they own the country 
versus the 30% or more (maybe as much as 60%) who make less than $50K so 
it will probably never float.  And then would that provide enough 
revenue (besides the fact that the 16th Amendment was never ratified so 
the collection of income taxes IS technically illegal and a scam in 
itself)?   But then you may be of the Grove Norquist school of economics 
and believe in drowning government anyway.  :-D


Reply via email to