Would it be fair for someone who makes $100,000 per year to pay $4 for a gallon of milk while someone who makes $25,000 per year only pays $1 for the same gallon at the same store? Surely not.

However, I’d certainly support a flat percentage tax as a far better solution than our current tax code, which explicitly punishes productivity, by discouraging our most productive workers from working extra hours.

Another argument against flat tax (in my mind) is that the greater income/wealth comes with greated responsibility.

I could probably be persuaded that a sales tax/VAT that excludes food items or has some sort of exemption to cover living expenses so as to not disproportionally hurt low income families is not a bad solution.

Thanks for the comment.

Why must we have to redistribute wealth? The fact that we must continually redistribute wealth should tell us that it doesn’t work, right?

The conversation gets complicated when we debate over the other main purpose of taxes.

Redistribution of Wealth – I personally think that taxes CAN BE effective in the redistribution of wealth. I believe that wealthier citizens have an increased obligation to make sure that the working poor have a reasonable standard of living. People will argue that it is more effective to let wealthier people invest in business and that will increase the standard of living of everyone. While this may be true, I believe that it is our nature to achieve as much wealth as possible and that without a system to redistribute wealth the working poor will have living condition that society finds unacceptable.

That last sentence is orthogonal. Yes, a sprawling, complicated tax system costs money. No, a sprawling, complicated tax system is not inherent or limited to a progressive tax system.

A progressive tax system isn’t inherently complicated; it’s complicated because of the amount of deductions and exceptions the legislature has built in. A flat tax could easily become just as complicated, and most likely would as taxes are one of the few ways the government can encourage desired behavior (e.g. home ownership).

Establishing fairness is about more than just stating it or drawing an analogy to religion.

A flat tax is fair, especially when you consider that most “poor” people pay less in taxes to the Government than the rich, yet they receive more benefits from the Government (welfare, food stamps, etc.)

This is, in fact, flat-out wrong. You’re confusing direct benefits with overall government spending; the former is a small fraction of the latter, and the latter is primarily about protecting private wealth, which benefits one in proportion to the amount of wealth she possesses.

Flat taxes are immoral and unfair? I respectfully disagree. I don’t see anything immoral in asking everyone to pay their fair share. I look at it like tithing. Tithing, which represents 10% of your income, is paid by all those who have agreed to tithe, whether they make $10,000 per year or $1,000,000 per year.

As long as EVERYONE is paying the same percentage, then the flat tax is the most MORAL tax.