>>>>>>In a much smaller way, I'd add my son Glen who started his own engineering business from scratch with non-stop sweat equity, imagination and hustle and is doing well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So, I am sure that you would have no problem with it if someone (the taxman) decided that your son had more money than he could ever spend and took 80% of it away...
>>>>>
>>>>>I think I made it clear that the high earners should pay more than my son.
>>>>
>>>>"Should"..."ought".....by whose authority? By what moral code?
>>>
>>>Good question.
>>>I can't speak for authority or moral code, but common sense tells me that people who take more out a closed system should put more back. If they don't the system will eventually implode.
>>
>>Wouldn't flat tax take care of that? Those who make more pay more. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.
>
>You could make a good case for that, Dimitry, if all deductions and tax shelters - offshore etc, were eliminated and all income were taxed at the same rate.
>Constitutionally, I think that we'd have to let municipal bond interest be tax exempt, but otherwise I'd tax everything.
>I'd put a large deductible up front so that low income taxpayers paid no tax and then apply that one rate to all income.
>
>In addition, I'd have a large deductible on inherited wealth and a very high flat rate after that.

We are on the same page. No tax loopholes and no tax shelters. Simple flat tax on ALL income, exempting low income folk. Unfortunately democrats don't want that.