I would like to start with the assumption that no tax is 'fair'. Unlike consumer action, there is generally not a direct measurable link between contribution and return. That being said, we are all aware that taxes are a necessary evil. We as a mobile society require investments we don't often realize are being made. How do we pay for these investments? Well it's generally true that those who benefit from taxes most (welfare, social security, etc) contribute the least. It's also generally true that those who are the most taxed utilize the public infrastructure more than those at the bottom of the economic totem poll. It's these two statements that support a continuation of the graduated tax system. Those with more can pay more. Socialists would maintain that those who earn more have the obligation to contribute more to society as it's society that allows them to earn as much as they do.

I don't see this analysis as completely wrong.

Currently I am in favor of a graduated tax system, but I'm for a complete overhaul of the tax system. Instead of these generalized taxes that give the Congress oodles of discretionary spending, we should have specific taxes that are for certain purposes only and make it a federal offense to divert funds from these specific purposes. We should only have LIMITED discretionary spending.

I think that a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget would be a good idea with the sole provision that warfare is exempt from the spending and that the congress will have to impose a special war tax or war bond for paying these debts.

__________________