BigCarbonFoot says:

But that truck hauls products you consume. So you could shift more tax to them, they raise prices and you still pay more road tax – just indirectly. Either approach could be “fair” depending on your viewpoint. And the real debate is what is fair share?

#30 – I didn’t bring up Fair tax and similar taxes to keep the argument simple. But, yes that’s wonderful debate. Is it more fair to tax income on a flat percentage or have no income tax and tax spending, which will hit the spenders far more than the savers?

For a while I was a huge proponent of Fair Tax but now I’m undecided on the issue.

Montanaguy says:

I’m not sure what’s ‘fair’ either, but the following facts are easily obtainable from the IRS and the Government Accounting Office:
The top 1% of income earners in this country pay over 40% of the income tax. The top 10% of income earners pay 71% of income tax revenue. The bottom 50% of income earners (yes, half of the citizens)pay a sum total of about 2.9% of income tax. (2006 figures)
In other words, those awful rich people, the entrepreneurs and small businesses in your town are paying the super-majority of the income tax, while the bottom 50% is pretty much along for the ride. That is a picture of a steeply progressive tax system. In addition, low income earners receive ‘income tax credits’ which is just a veiled welfare system flying under the radar.
It’s easy for Nobama and other libs to rant about the rich “paying their fair share”, because it’s a small target group of voters and it sounds great. Odd, though, how the ultra-rich trial lawyers, who basically run the donkocrat party, (and congress for that matter) get no mention for their abuses by democrats because that’s one of their largest cash cows. The trial lawyers, through systematic terrorization via the courts have been an enormous drain on the economy and in spite of their denial, are a major reason for the rising cost of health-care insurance. Ask any neurosurgeon or ER doc or obstetrician what percentage of their charges and tests and prodedures (not to mention malpractice insurance) are due to defensive medicine (i.e. putting a stake in the hearts of the ambulance chasers before they contemplate their lawsuit). I know quite a few of them and the usual answer is “about 30%”. Some say considerably more.

ECA says:

This needs to be reposted..
send it back to the front.