Do you believe that the graduated income tax is fair method of taxing citizens?

Answer 1

The graduated income tax is destructive and unconstitutional. The suggestion that taxes should be applied "to each according to their means" is indicative of a national psychosis. The premise, which suggests incremental increases in the percentages applied to those at various income levels, is somehow rational, should disturb even those who received their high school diploma through a public education program.

The bottom-line is that so much money is injected into the government sector through the generosity of the taxpayers that individuals can't afford to pay any more in taxes, even those earning more than $250K annually. It is hardly "fair" to penalize success. It is also not "fair" that some of the most wealthy pay less in tax than upper middle-income citizens.

When we think that the oil companies, with international investments, made $640 billion in 2007 many become outraged. But, the untold story is that during that same time frame the government made $1.3 trillion without putting a bit on a drill. Then consider a pro-athlete who makes a $20 million deal for five years. Without risking life and limb or engaging in developing their athletic abilities, the government garners over 50% of their income for doing nothing. Big lottery winners are also victimized by the punitive taxation imposed on them.

It would certainly be more "fair" if everyone paid a flat-tax, even your paperboy; that is if you support any taxation on your regular earnings. If that's the case, eliminate all deductions in the private sector, cease taking taxes out of a government employee's pay check and just pay them the standard after-tax rate, and prevent any individual elected or appointed to work in a capitol to receive any compensation, especially benefits after their term, if they serve while there is any deficit.

JCP