On May 25, 5:08*pm, "Scout"
wrote:
"John Smith" wrote in message

...









On 5/25/2011 4:12 PM, Sid9 wrote:

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 5/25/2011 3:59 PM, Scout wrote:

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 5/25/2011 12:43 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote innews:irh49m$id0$3@dont-
email.me:

On 5/24/2011 1:18 PM, wrote:
...
You chose the easy point of my post to reply to.

The point you ignored is that your suggested system - "Let me put
this
more bluntly. If I buy and item and pay 7% sales tax, the top one
percent should buy an item and pay a 42.7% sales tax, that way they
will be contributing their fair share to run government ..." - is
either impossible to implement, or requires a dictatorship.
...

Yes, that is a fair system, you simply want to take it literally and
say
it doesn't work. I am not stuck on any particular system to
implement
it with. Any system which can demonstrate that it can successfully
accomplish the goal, and costing the least, would be great.

THINK for a change, John. How would a system like that have to work?
How would a merchant know whether to charge 7% sales tax or 42% sales
tax
or some amount in between?

Any system only needs to manage that 1% of those with control of
42.7%
of the financial money pay 42.7% of the sales taxes. And that 20% at
the top pay 50.3% of the taxes.

And just how do you think it knows which one you are? Or who is in
those
brackets? You are looking at Big Brother from 1984 big time.

I simply gave a simplified version of what is to be accomplished.

No, you showed that you really don't understand what is involved in
that
scheme.
Those
with any common sense would have realized it was over simplified ....

REally, really oversimplified....so much so that you don't seem to
have
any grasp of the basics.

I don't give a rats arse how you get the water from the well, just
that
the water comes from the well ...

If you are whining about the costs and fairness of things, you really
should care. In this case you are pushing the costs would completely
overwhelm the result.

I said everyone needs taxed at an equal rate on every dollar earned
...

So much for sales tax then.

Once again, I really don't care how it is implemented, it just has to
work out to a final flat tax on all the money earned ... make a
dollar, pay the tax on the dollar, make a hundred, pay the tax time a
hundred, make a thousand pay the tax times a thousand ... scalable in
either direction.

And, has been mentioned, no matter what system is finally chosen,
crooks will ALWAYS attempt to escape paying their fair share ... as is
happening with the rich elite today ...

Regards,
JS

A simple solution for a complicated problem...and it's wrong.

You need to equalize the BURDEN....You need to equalize the effect the
tax has on the taxpayers life

Anything which is better than what we have now will be better ... end of
story.

Not true, things could be a lot worse, but they could also be better.

No, read what he wrote: "Anything which is better than what we have
now will be better".

Admittedly, this could go for the Obvious Statement of the Decade
Award and blow away the competition.