Aha!

[kengr]

Listening to folks on the news talking about the Massachusetts court decision being a "danger to marriage in this country", I suddenly had a flash of insight. Which lead to the following *evil* thought...

No Special Rights for Heterosexuals!
Support Gay Marriage!

After all "no special rights" has long been a cry of the folks trying to prevent gays from getting various rights the straights have. This time, we ought to take that card away from them.

And best of all, it's even *true*!

Comments

[gentlemaitresse.livejournal.com]

Head tax is LESS fair? How do you figure that? How can it be less fair for each individual to pay an equal share? Don't the poor and the wealthy pay the same for a dozen eggs or a head of lettuce?

I wasn't aware of these things, however, being part of our country's history. I'll go do some reading on it now. Thanks. :-)

[kengr]

Simple. You don't *have* to buy that head of lettuce. You *do* have to pay the head tax.

Therefore, if it's not scaled against your resources somehow, you can be ruined.

[gentlemaitresse.livejournal.com]

Everybody has to eat.

I don't think a sliding scale is fair. I've always been in favor of a head tax, I just never knew it was originally the way citizens of this country were taxed.

[kengr]

Yes, everyone has to eat. But they get to shop around, and can (in many places) suplement that by foraging & hunting. They get to choose how much and *what* they buy in the way of food.

With taxes, especially head taxes, you don't to chose.

The trouble with a head tax is that it can't work now.

Divide the federal budget by the population. Then ask how many people could afford that? Even if you pare away the stuff *you* consider worthless, it'd still be more than poor people could pay.

The budget is in the trillions. The population is 300 million. Say the budget is *only* 3 trillion. That'd make the head tax $10,000 *per person*. You've got a husband and 4 or 5 kids (I forget the exact number). Could *you* afford $60,000 a year?

And even if you could, how many other people couldn't afford $10k per person in their household?

Also, consider that your same argument that businesses should pay because they get more from government applies to people with higher incomes. They get more out of having police, fire and various other things. If for no other reason than they've got more to *lose*.

Frankly, I'd like to see the deductions rationalized, and the tax *rate* set to a signle percentage. So everybody gets their income (after deductions that would be far simpler) above some number (say, the "poverty level") taxed at that rate.

Oh yeah, consider that the idea of owing a fixed *portion* of your income goes way, way back. Consider stuff such as tithing.