Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site hou3c.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!hou3c!ka From: ka@hou3c.UUCP (Kenneth Almquist) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: VATs That!!! Message-ID: <312@hou3c.UUCP> Date: Mon, 20-Feb-84 19:04:01 EST Article-I.D.: hou3c.312 Posted: Mon Feb 20 19:04:01 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 21-Feb-84 07:57:30 EST References: <685@ihuxq.UUCP> Organization: Bell Labs, Holmdel, NJ Lines: 28 Who was it who proposed merging net.politics and net.flame on the grounds that the contents were identical? At any rate, the article this is a response to is the silliest attack on Democrats that I have seen in a while. Since Richard Covert doesn't explain the theory behind the value added tax, I will do so. With an income tax, all income is taxed. With a VAT, on the other hand, only income spent on consumption is taxed, and as a result people are presumably likely to invest more. There is at least on problem with the VAT; since poor people don't have any money to invest, it is a regressive tax. At this point I don't recall who has supported the idea of a VAT. And Ricahrd Covert doesn't say. Instead, he writes: President Reagon is on ther record as OPPOSING the VAT. OK. (Although I would remind him that Reagan is also on record as opposing draft registration and the 55 MPH speed limit.) Can any of your Demo candidates claim the same??? Quite likely not. The VAT is a dead issue at this point, so it's likely that no one has every asked the candidates what their position was. If you really feel that any significant portion of the Democratic party is going to support a regressive tax, then you haven't been watching the Democratic party very carefully. Kenneth Almquist