Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site petrus.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!petrus!hammond
From: hammond@petrus.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.taxes
Subject: Re: Abuse of social contracts. (tax system)
Message-ID: <287@petrus.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 14-Feb-85 08:19:10 EST
Article-I.D.: petrus.287
Posted: Thu Feb 14 08:19:10 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 15-Feb-85 04:40:17 EST
References: <2748@dartvax.UUCP> <445@ahuta.UUCP> <399@lsuc.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Inc
Lines: 27
Xref: watmath net.legal:1398 net.taxes:659

> In article <445@ahuta.UUCP> 45223wc@ahuta.UUCP (Bill Cambre) writes:
> ||					Now if we had
> ||tax reforms to a simple tax code where everyone just paid x%,  I believe
> ||fewer people will cheat and we will all be happier knowing everyone pays
> ||relatively the same percentage.  But that's another discussion.
> 
> It sure is. A fixed percentage causes hardship for those with
> low incomes. The progressive system of brackets and marginal
> rates is perceived as the "fairest", and is used in both the
> U.S. and Canada.
> ...
> Dave Sherman

You're slightly unfair, he did mention in the next paragraph
deducting the first y dollars of income, which makes it a
slightly progressive system, presumeably, if you make the y
large enough (say 5k/exemption) then low income taxpayers
pay nothing.

I'm not sure a progressive system is fairer!
It came about in the US because when it was first started,
it really only hit the upper class.  With inflation a good
deal of the middle class has moved into the progressive region.
Also, in the US social security is a very regressive system,
it only taxes the first $38000 (at 7%) of income.

Rich Hammond