Letter to the editor: More on fairness in taxation | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: More on fairness in taxation

I want to thank James Kvitkovich for his response (“Capitalism & taxes,” May 23, TribLIVE) to my letter on fairness in taxation (“Fairness in taxation,” May 2, TribLIVE). He calculated an average tax payment of $10,299 per taxpayer for 2015, claiming how draconian a capitalistic approach is to taxation, in which each taxpayer is responsible for an equal share of the nation’s tax burden. 

However, what I see as draconian is the $10,299 per taxpayer representing the actual cost of the government’s tax burden. Since over the past 100 years our nation has embraced a more communistic approach to income taxation (from each according to his ability to each according to his needs), the cost of the tax burden is buffered by the higher-income taxpayers carrying most of it.

Imagine if the same concept were carried over to one’s car payments or house mortgage. Would it be right to ask your wealthy neighbor to pay for those costs also — since they have more wealth and could afford to do so? (Some would say yes — we call those people thieves.)

Unlike their taxes, most people shop around for homes and cars that will fit their budget. If the average taxpayer were faced with the real equal cost of $10,299 per year, they would most likely choose to elect different legislators to cut taxes and unnecessary government expenses.

Joel Last


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.