[Rhodes22-list] Flat Tax Anyone? Tossing ball back to Slim (political rant)

[DCLewis1 at aol.com]

Interesting that Ed thinks 36% tax is an oppressive tax rate (and that’s  the 
max rate, not on your gross, its after deductions).  Look at the roads  you 
travel, the ATC, national security, public health, the commerce  
infrastructure, etc - seems like a one time good deal to me.  
 
For those of you who worry that you’re paying school taxes for other  peoples 
kids, ask yourself who is going to be paying into the Social Security  fund 
on your behalf 10 years from now - it’s those kids.  You better hope  they’re 
educated and have good jobs, their Soc Security deposits are going  straight 
to you.
 
Further, while Ed makes a good point regarding founders that begin and  
develop companies, I suggest they are likely a small fraction of the 1% under  
discussion.  I would encourage you to consider the real 1% - consider the  Grasso’
s, who didn’t start, found, begin or develop anything he just got the  NYSE to 
give him an egregious pay package.  Or Nardelli of Home Depot, or  Skilling 
of Enron, or Conrad Black accused of looting the Tribune, or the guys  that 
looted Tyco, or McKinnel of Pfizer, or Immelt of GE, or  Waggoner of  GM, or Ford 
of Ford......  Lets cut out the mythology and deal with cases,  and there are 
a ton of cases, and in all those cases the MBAs that won the water  cooler 
wars stepped up to run major corporations and made out like bandits -  that’s 
the real story and that’s the real 1%.  I can't think of a single  S&P 500 
corporation that's run by it founder.  And I respectfully  suggest that the MBAs 
that win the water cooler wars are no more entitled to  special tax 
consideration by society than anyone else - they are not founders,  they are watch 
standers, and there is a difference.
 
Regarding founders: If you do found and develop a public company, you make  
out like a bandit even with the current tax code - and I don’t begrudge that 
one  bit.  But you reasonably make out so incredibly well that even after taxes  
you are incredibly well off.  Consider Phil Knight, the guy who founded  Nike 
- I think he’s the 48th richest guy in the US even after the current taxes,  
and that’s fine but he doesn’t need a change in the tax code to help him out  
he’s doing very well thank you.  Consider Bill Gates, I think the richest  
guy in the US, money up the gazoo - under the current tax code.  Michael  Dell, 
absolutely not suffering at all - under the present tax code.  None  of the 
founder types I’ve mentioned need special consideration from the tax  code, they 
are all doing very very well by any standard - and I don’t begrudge  their 
doing well, but neither do I feel sympathy for the tax they pay.   They’ve got 
it made and some of the reasons they have it made is the larger  society 
respects and enforces their intellectual property rights - at a real  cost to the 
larger society - the larger society facilitates their production  efforts with 
roads, power, terminals and infrastructure and security of all  sorts, and 
generally enables the commerce that they profit from so greatly - so  maybe they 
should pay more for that increased support.  If that increased  support weren’t 
there, they’d have nothing or very much less.  The customs  inspector 
standing on the dock looking for counterfeit Nikes is not paid by Phil  Knight, but 
Phil Knight benefits directly from that customs inspector's  activities, maybe 
Phil Knight should pay more tax than the rest of us.   Maybe Bill Gates should 
pay more taxes, the US Government is investing time and  manpower trying to 
mitigate software pirating efforts in Asia and around the  world, a direct 
significant beneficiary is - Bill Gates.  I don’t begrudge  any of these guys 
their wealth, but I also think they, more than some day worker  in South Carolina, 
are constructively exploiting, using, and benefiting from the  full range of 
government services and in consideration they should pay more  taxes.  
 
Dave