|
Pages: [1]
|
 |
|
 Poll
|
| Question: |
Are you more concerned about "no tax evasion" or about having "more progressive taxes"?
| No tax evasion |
|
   2 (100%) |
| More progressive taxes |
|
0 (0%) |
| Neither, I hate taxes |
|
0 (0%) |
| Neither, I have a better option |
|
0 (0%) |
|
|
| Total Voters: 2 |
|
Author
|
Topic: What sounds better? (Read 983 times)
|
|
|
Krulle
Enlightened
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 1115
*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!
|
Regarding your image:
What does "internet" have to do with "no discrimination".
I feel more disciminated since the INet....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Krulle
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1115
*Hurghi*! Krulle is *spitting* again!
|
Ah, okay.
Also, one government for one world,w ith one tax regime would end tax evasion quasi-automagically. At least the glaringly obvious tax holes which are used for things like the double-irish-dutch sandwich....
And I am not concerned "more" about one or the other, they form one linked concept, and both need to be tackled for taxation fairness.
Therefore we need progressive taxation, as strong shoulders can and should carry more, as well as no tax evasion as both together form taxation fairness.
Having a good progressive taxation will not work if some are able to evade taxation; and blocking tax-evasion will improve cause grumbling about unfair or lacking progressive taxation.
Hmm, I do think eliminating tax evasion is slightly more important. Because then you play by the rules, and block "selecting the rules"...
And I do like taxes. Pays for necessities I use like roads.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Zanthius
Enlightened
Offline
Posts: 941
|
I agree with all of your reasoning Krulle.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
|
|
|
