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