Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mmm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!stolaf!mmm!mrgofor
From: mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR)
Newsgroups: net.taxes
Subject: Re: Responses on Schiff stuff
Message-ID: <617@mmm.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 17-Mar-86 09:36:30 EST
Article-I.D.: mmm.617
Posted: Mon Mar 17 09:36:30 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 18-Mar-86 07:58:14 EST
References: <1177@decwrl.DEC.COM> <521@mmm.UUCP> <12205@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <362@vger.UUCP>
Reply-To: mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR)
Organization: none
Lines: 22

In article <362@vger.UUCP> ray@vger.UUCP (Ray Swartz) writes:
>
>Indirect taxes have indirect impacts!  Taxes on consumption are
>notorious for being regressive - actually forcing poorer people
>to pay higher taxes.  An example would be a tax on toilet paper.
>Since we all use it, those with less money would pay a higher
>percentage of their income to the government.
>
>Ray Swartz
>

	Wellllll, the poor could shit at work. :-)

	The unemployed could get Toilet Paper Stamps. :-)



-- 
					--MKR

Sometimes even the President of the United States must have to 
stand naked.    - Dylan