Posted on 05/06/2007 7:34:16 AM PDT by Phantom Lord
“Let’s make EVERY U.S. citizen pay a flat tax (fair tax, whatever)...”
I favor a “Lump Sum” tax. Every adult pays the same dollar amount in taxes, regardless of income, employment, education, marital status, number of children, etc: The same dollar amount, no deductions.
Liken it to purchasing a car. If a car dealer sells a car for $15K, the car costs 15K. Period. Say you make twice as much money as I do. The dealer won’t charge me half of what he would charge you just because I make half of what you do.
If you or I can’t pay for the car, we don’t buy it.
If you or I can’t pay the lump sum tax, we don’t vote.
Every adult pays the same dollar amount. What could be more fair than that?
After all, we can’t have any discrimination.
So we all just check female. :-)
I like this idea. Will put my company in wifes name.
The printed tax code today is only 10 stories high. Let’s double it.
Link to PDF of the academic paper by these two bozo “economists”:
http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/alesina/papers/genderbasedtaxation-0307.pdf
(And why in hell are two Italians telling the U.S. how to tax its citizens?)
Dealers generally have a variety of cars for people to choose from. Some people would find a $15,000 car too expensive, and so would buy something cheaper. Others would find a $15,000 car unsatisfactory, and so would buy something more expensive. I am unaware of any government offering anything like that option.
a woman is offered the same $X for an identical job in the same department and she takes $X.
If the woman is just as good as the guy, why would the employer want to pay $X+x for a worker when it could get the same work performed for $X?
employers ALWAYS give the lowest price first, and most men know that, and will try to bargain for a better position.(better pay/perks/vacation/etc) for what ever reason(according to HR people i have known) women are less likely to bargain for their job.
and THAT... is not my problem.
Yes, but if there are two equally-good applicants for a job, why wouldn't an employer hire the one who would work cheaper?
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
LOL
read my first post... there were TWO openings!!! he got one and she got the other. he just bargained for better pay than she did. see what i mean?
not to mention they could BOTH be under paid for what they are doing because they company low balled them to start with.
And i was lamblasted for criticizing the Ivy League loony liberalism which has been destroying our country?
Has constitutionality ever deterred feminazis?
Maybe if they were taxed (to help cover jacking up our school & medical costs) they’d stay in Mexico where they belong. Not likely I know, but would still be nice.
Neither has empirical logic nor has steadfastness and universal application of the "principles" that they claim to hold so dear.
If we are going to tax women less than men ought we, then, not pay men considerably more than women [much more than the difference they’re paid now] because men will need higher wages to pay for the difference in income tax?
Obviously there isn’t.
Can’t make everybody happy, eh? Let’s let the social engineers be the unhappy ones. Perhaps they should just admit that their goals are not desired.
OK, I can buy that lower taxes on people over 55, and for engineers. :) And for everybody, for that matter.
Just abolish the income tax, and fire the bureaucrats.
Do I get a tax break?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.