TED Conversations

Tony Sandy

This conversation is closed.

Fairer form of taxes for all citizens

Taxes to be fair, should be based on percentages of money earned, so that no group in society can claim they are being victimized by it e.g. 10%, so that someone earning a £100, would pay £10 and someone earning a £1,000, would pay a £100.

There would be no allowances for anyone because everybody needs to pay out something for their work, whether it is transport, food, clothing or tools and this includes employees, bosses (machinery/ canteen/ haulage etc) and the self employed.

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Feb 20 2012: Everything is taxed from hamburgers to roads. I presume what you are saying is that where you live, there isn't a blanket cover for road users, so that everyone pays the same rate? I live in Britain and don't drive. Also you seem to be taking the attitude it should be the way it is, rather than the simplification I'm proposing. So what is the reason it is different where you are? What are the road tax laws based on exactly (Tell me this and we've got a basis for discussion as it is I'm missing data you seem to be aware of).
    • thumb
      Feb 20 2012: look, i see no point in repeating myself. i can't explain it any better.
    • Feb 20 2012: Tony,

      Allow me to (try and) simplify Krisztian's comments:

      Why isn't the transaction for road use (or any publically funded venture) the same as the transaction for a hamburger? Why can I not play a flat rate on what I use?

      An eaiser example: I paid for my house. I use my house. I pay property taxes which pay for education system. I have no kids in education system.

      Even if I paid a flat rate income tax, it still is not fair that I pay taxes for schools that I do not use. Similarly, even if we paid a flat rate income tax, it would still be unfair that somebody could possibly be paying more absolute dollars in taxes (which fund roads, for example) than someone else, but is using the roads substantially less (a work at home entrepeneur v. an assembly line worker that commutes 25 miles to the factory everyday, for example).

      All of this is to say that your premise - a flat rate would guarantee 'fairness' - is faulty and only works if you define 'fairness' as a 'flat rate tax system', in which case your argument is circular.. and still faulty.

      SEP

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.