Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lsuc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!dave
From: dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman)
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.taxes
Subject: Re: Abuse of social contracts. (tax system)
Message-ID: <418@lsuc.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 17-Feb-85 02:38:25 EST
Article-I.D.: lsuc.418
Posted: Sun Feb 17 02:38:25 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 17-Feb-85 03:25:59 EST
References: <2748@dartvax.UUCP> <445@ahuta.UUCP> <399@lsuc.UUCP> <110@styx.UUCP>
Reply-To: dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman)
Organization: Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto
Lines: 21
Xref: utcs net.legal:1416 net.taxes:607

In article <110@styx.UUCP> mcb@styx.UUCP (Michael C. Berch) writes:
||Perceived by whom? I can't agree. There is something
||democratically satisfying about the idea that both more AND less
||fortunate people pay the same percentage of their gross income to
||the government to support its basic services. 

Perhaps I'm writing from a different tradition. Although I'm in
a high bracket, I don't really object to paying proportionately
more in tax than those with lower incomes. Canadian society,
perhaps more than that of the U.S., has a strong social tradition
which, while retaining (mostly) the capitalist system, believes
that all of society is entitled to certain basics. Hence we have
government health plans for all, generous (probably too generous)
welfare and unemployment insurance, and so on. The cost has
to be borne somehow, and those with low incomes need them more
than I do to eat.

Dave Sherman
-- 
{utzoo pesnta nrcaero utcs}!lsuc!dave
{allegra decvax ihnp4 linus}!utcsrgv!lsuc!dave