TAXES: Who got a break?

Long, long ago in a galaxy far, far away the government decided to impose an income tax. Now the country's population was divided into two groups: the A's (who were poor making a $1,000 per pay period) and the B's (who were rich making $10,000 in the same period). The government calculated that it needed to collect $1,100 from each pair of A and B. Their first thought was to have a uniform tax of 10 percent whereby each A would pay $100 and each B $1,000. Some officials, however, saw an opportunity to gain favor (and votes) from the A's by deciding on a progressive tax of 8 percent for the A's and 10.2 percent for the B's. Thus each A was taxed $80 and each B $1,020 again yielding $1,100 from each pair.

Now an interesting question is who got a tax break in this scheme (which, incidentally, is the one we use here in the USA)? Years later some people in government began promoting the idea of a more equitable tax structure which they thought seemed much more fair. Realizing they'd never get the approval of the A's for a completely fair tax they thought maybe 9 percent for the A's and 10.1 percent for the B's. Well the people (the A's) howled at this notion of a "tax break for the rich" conveniently overlooking who had the tax break in the first place. Some of the A's wanted to drag the B's from their homes and stone them to death on their front lawns. Fortunately this idea did not catch on.

Some in government (they were called liberals) continued to promote the progressive tax whereby the more the rich were taxed the better, and "tax breaks for the rich" became a war cry used to stir up emotions and prevent rational thinking. In this way the liberals generated a lot of support (and votes) from the A's who quickly adapted to this nanny state approach.

PHIL MEMBURY

Coeur d'Alene