Politically?
Politically, the most damaging criticism is that a consumption tax could obliterate the idea of a progressive tax system and shift much of the tax burden from the rich to middle-income people and the poor.
—White House Floats Idea of Dropping Income Tax Overhaul, New York Times, 8 February 2003.
Politically? How about morally? Ethically? Hello?
Oh. Right.
(Yes, old news. It’s being a week, okay? More later, if and when.)
Commenting is closed for this article.
the administration said the proposal was "intended to promote work"
... and in other news, the administration said proposals to scrap the Federal Food Stamp Act were "intended to promote dieting." That's the news, sports are next!
"Politically, the most damaging criticism..."
There is no morally or ethically damaging criticism. They are so sure of themselves that their morals or ethics cannot be damaged. Assuming, of course, that they have anything that could objectively be identified as morals or ethics.
And today, Michael Novak, guru of American Enterprise Institute, drops the other shoe: the progressive income tax is immoral in and of itself, and should be replaced on that ground alone.
Why? Because 'victims' of the income tax resent paying a greater proportion of their income than their poorer fellow citizens.
JC