Backdoor to socialized medicine?

[CardiffBaseball]

I would like to know how a flat tax is regressive? Most proposals exclude a certain amount of income automatically making it progressive.

Let’s say we had a 20% tax on all income over 50K.

Family A – 60K
Taxable income – 10k
Tax Paid – 10k*20% = 2K
Income Tax % – $2k/60K = 3.33%

Family B – 80K
Taxable Income – 30K
Tax Paid – $30k*20% = 6K
Income Tax % – 6k/80k = 7.5%

Family C – 150K
Taxable Income – 100K
Tax Paid – $100k*20% = 20k
Income Tax % – 20K/150K = 13.3%

[briansd1]

How about family D at $100 million?

[briansd1]

How about family D at $100 million?

[briansd1]

How about family D at $100 million?

[briansd1]

How about family D at $100 million?

[briansd1]

How about family D at $100 million?

[SK in CV]

[quote=CardiffBaseball]I would like to know how a flat tax is regressive? Most proposals exclude a certain amount of income automatically making it progressive.

Let’s say we had a 20% tax on all income over 50K.

[/quote]

In which case, you have a regressive tax on all income over $50,000, because a greater burden, relative to resources, is placed on those with incomes, say between $50,000 and $150,000 than those with income over $250,000, since basic needs are still being met at marginal income above $50,000, but not above $250,000.

It would be less regressive than say a VAT, but regressive, nonetheless.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CardiffBaseball]I would like to know how a flat tax is regressive? Most proposals exclude a certain amount of income automatically making it progressive.

Let’s say we had a 20% tax on all income over 50K.

[/quote]

In which case, you have a regressive tax on all income over $50,000, because a greater burden, relative to resources, is placed on those with incomes, say between $50,000 and $150,000 than those with income over $250,000, since basic needs are still being met at marginal income above $50,000, but not above $250,000.

It would be less regressive than say a VAT, but regressive, nonetheless.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CardiffBaseball]I would like to know how a flat tax is regressive? Most proposals exclude a certain amount of income automatically making it progressive.

Let’s say we had a 20% tax on all income over 50K.

[/quote]

In which case, you have a regressive tax on all income over $50,000, because a greater burden, relative to resources, is placed on those with incomes, say between $50,000 and $150,000 than those with income over $250,000, since basic needs are still being met at marginal income above $50,000, but not above $250,000.

It would be less regressive than say a VAT, but regressive, nonetheless.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CardiffBaseball]I would like to know how a flat tax is regressive? Most proposals exclude a certain amount of income automatically making it progressive.

Let’s say we had a 20% tax on all income over 50K.

[/quote]

In which case, you have a regressive tax on all income over $50,000, because a greater burden, relative to resources, is placed on those with incomes, say between $50,000 and $150,000 than those with income over $250,000, since basic needs are still being met at marginal income above $50,000, but not above $250,000.

It would be less regressive than say a VAT, but regressive, nonetheless.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CardiffBaseball]I would like to know how a flat tax is regressive? Most proposals exclude a certain amount of income automatically making it progressive.

Let’s say we had a 20% tax on all income over 50K.

[/quote]

In which case, you have a regressive tax on all income over $50,000, because a greater burden, relative to resources, is placed on those with incomes, say between $50,000 and $150,000 than those with income over $250,000, since basic needs are still being met at marginal income above $50,000, but not above $250,000.

It would be less regressive than say a VAT, but regressive, nonetheless.

[Coronita]

[quote=briansd1]

John 50yo $500
Jake 50yo $500
Don 35yo $400

Total $1,400

Company B

Dave 50yo $500
Jane 35yo $400
Joe 35yo $400

Total $1,300 Company B pays $100 less in total.

[/quote]

My god, where are you getting these numbers from? Have you looked at what insurances rates are for someone with preexisting conditions non-cancerous or even someone who wants to insure a family?
Are you suggesting that it’s not likely any of these companies will be paying for premiums amounts above that “Caddy plan limit”?

[Coronita]

[quote=briansd1]

John 50yo $500
Jake 50yo $500
Don 35yo $400

Total $1,400

Company B

Dave 50yo $500
Jane 35yo $400
Joe 35yo $400

Total $1,300 Company B pays $100 less in total.

[/quote]

My god, where are you getting these numbers from? Have you looked at what insurances rates are for someone with preexisting conditions non-cancerous or even someone who wants to insure a family?
Are you suggesting that it’s not likely any of these companies will be paying for premiums amounts above that “Caddy plan limit”?

[Coronita]

[quote=briansd1]

John 50yo $500
Jake 50yo $500
Don 35yo $400

Total $1,400

Company B

Dave 50yo $500
Jane 35yo $400
Joe 35yo $400

Total $1,300 Company B pays $100 less in total.

[/quote]

My god, where are you getting these numbers from? Have you looked at what insurances rates are for someone with preexisting conditions non-cancerous or even someone who wants to insure a family?
Are you suggesting that it’s not likely any of these companies will be paying for premiums amounts above that “Caddy plan limit”?

[Coronita]

[quote=briansd1]

John 50yo $500
Jake 50yo $500
Don 35yo $400

Total $1,400

Company B

Dave 50yo $500
Jane 35yo $400
Joe 35yo $400

Total $1,300 Company B pays $100 less in total.

[/quote]

My god, where are you getting these numbers from? Have you looked at what insurances rates are for someone with preexisting conditions non-cancerous or even someone who wants to insure a family?
Are you suggesting that it’s not likely any of these companies will be paying for premiums amounts above that “Caddy plan limit”?

[Author]

Posts