Electoral Reform

[kandrathe]

I don't see the argument. Everyone, equally, is taxed based on their income. You make X money, you pay Y taxes. Don't like how much Y is? Make less money, it's not like anyone's forcing you to work.

It is, to my mind, like the justice system. If you steal something, you are not entitled to avoid prison because people who didn't steal anything don't have to go to prison. That's not how equal protection works. You get the same set of laws applied to you as anyone else. It says nothing about the outcome, except that it be fairly applied to everyone equally.

There is nothing enshrined in the constitution that says each dollar must receive equal protection. I can see the argument that progressive taxation is bad, although I strongly disagree. But that it's unconstitutional? I don't think that makes sense.

-Jester

This will be a long stretch for you, since I think you are a progressive and believe the government has a right to take peoples property. I am a libertarian and believe that the government has only those rights as is spelled out in the charter of government, and all other rights are retained by the citizens.

No, dollars do not receive equal protection. Citizens do. If the government seizes part of my property in the name of X, but allows my neighbor to keep all his because of some "status", that is a violation of equal protection. If that "status" was skin color... Or sexual orientation... You'd sing another tune. In creating a protected class of "Low Income" people the government has burdened the remainder with an unequal share of the costs of government. When the reason for the ever increasing cost of government is to give more to the protected "low income" class, and the bar of who is "low income" is raised ever higher, the result is that eventually the burden will be shifted to a minority of tax payers. Ergo, class warfare.

So, those people who report low income, or actually have low income are given protected status. As the definition of the bar of "low" is raised, and as the burden on the "producers" increases your advice is for them to get poor. And, then... Allow the government to be your nanny. This is the road to communism. If you can't see that, well, I can't paint the picture any more clearly. How about instead all people pay taxes equally? If you earn income you should pay income taxes, so when you vote for people that support tax increases you are burdening yourself along with all the other citizens.

I would rather we do away with income taxes over time, and begin to tax consumption. If you are really a "Save the Planet" global citizen, then you'd embrace taxing consumption as a way to curb consumerism. But, progressives don't want to tax consumption. That would force the low income people to share in the burden of government according to their share of the consumption. I don't know where this idea came from that "government" could go looking around to the deepest pockets and go take that money. The fundamental right of a citizen is to keep his legally obtained earnings and property, and this was the reason for the American Revolution. Just because a person is successful and diligent, or just lucky is no cause for the government to target that citizen and unfairly burden them. If that fortunate citizen has a soft spot for the underprivileged, it is their decision if they would share their good fortune. If we decide as a society to fund social programs, then we citizens should shoulder that burden equally and not duck out to pass the burden onto a fortunate minority, or borrow it from the future.

I would also like to point out a distinction here: We are not talking about the wealthy and the poor. The wealthy have no reason to earn an income. If Bill Gates wanted to pay zero taxes, it would be entirely within his means to do so and still remain the worlds richest person for his entire life. So, when we tax wage earners, we are really taxing productivity and those who choose to contribute to the GNP. So, do the "Low Income" class fund elections? Or, is it more likely that some wealthy "No Income" force is forging a political voting block?

There is no free lunch. Someone earned it and bought it for you. Why? There is a motive if you care to see it.