The problem of taxing income lies not in the rates or the progression of rates, or even with “exceptions” intended to reduce the burden on the “poor” (whatever that means).
It is with the very definition of “income.” Wages? Capital gains (long or short)? Dividends? and on and on. And what about the notion of “imputed income”? What is the value of all those welfare freebies and handouts?
The solution is a consumption tax applied to all end-use purchases, with a rebate to every person (not “family”) each year of a fixed amount.
Taxing only end-use purchases prevents multiple taxation. Taxation at points prior to end-use are necessarily paid by all subsequent purchasers, not by the producer, because the producer must make a profit net of taxes.
A fixed rebate eliminates the tax burden on everyone below a certain consumption level (yes some very low level consumers might actually make a net profit), and rapidly causes the net tax rate to reach a fixed, flat level once consumption exceeds the threshold represented by the rebate.
Here is the problem with his argument.
It doesn’t take into accout that when a rat is in office, he will raise the rate. And the libs in the house and senate will go along with that.