• the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Not most of their money, no. Way more than I spend on goods. Exponentially more. I have no faith that the current admin will pull this off in a way that benefits the 99% but it’s not outside the realm of possibility that some form of consumption tax would. It doesn’t have to be regressive.

      • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        16 hours ago

        There is literally no way to put a flat tax on goods without it disproportionately effecting poorer people unless it is exclusively on luxury goods they are not buying

        • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          And yet, if it replaced income tax, it could affect the wealthy who are currently paying nothing. It’s not a perfect solution. If implemented right, it could be an improvement over the current one.

          • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            16 hours ago

            Ok, so yes, more ultra rich may pay a little more tax than they would with income tax. But, the much more important part here, the poorest people will ALSO pay more in taxes, money that they do not have to spare. That is what makes it regressive.

            • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              15 hours ago

              That’s a good point. I forgot there were people who weren’t paying any income tax at all at the lower end of the wealth spectrum.