Quote:
Originally Posted by lookout123
Your definition of fair is that someone who earns more than you should pay a significantly higher percentage of their taxes even though they will probably benefit less from government programs than you? How did we ever come to define that as progressive or fair?
|
I think it started with Adam Smith in the "Wealth of Nations"
The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion...
Teddy Roosevelt was the next big proponent of a progressive income tax, with basically the same argument.....the lower one's income, the greater that income is needed for basic necessities....thus, they should be taxed at a lower rate than those with greater disposal income.
The progressive income tax has been around for 80+ years and supported by Democrats and Republicans presidents alike...the issue has been the rate at which the tax rates should rise with income.