But does that not raise the same question of fairness?  Each person or family has an essential basket ofgoods and services that must be purchased to live a moderate standard of living--food, clothing, utilities, shelter, transportation etc .  The low income person would pay a much higher percentage of his incomepurchasing these necessities than a wealthy person and have much less left over for inessential thingssuch as travel, educational opportunities such as museums, musical events and other cultural activities.Perhaps a hybrid could be worked out whereby people below a certain income paid no VAT or sales taxand establish another sliding scale depending on income for people above that level.  I admit that theidea is attractive--no IRS, fewer intrusions into our personal lives by armed bureaucrats, no tax lawyers as there would be zero exemptions, no HR Block offices and no need for hordes of Lobbyists on K street chasing our representatives seeking special treatment under the tax code.  I also know that manyEuropean nations have this--some in lieu of the income tax, some in addition to it.  I have also heard that in order to meet the same dollar level as all other taxes it would exceed 25 percent!Still, it is an attractive alternative, but one sure to attract fierce opposition from all those who thriveunder the status quo.  Would it not be wonderful to have no tax obligations each spring as you would be paying as you go--what a relief that would be.  Has any serious politician had the intestinal fortitude topropose such a thing?  I remember poor Mr. Forbes with his tax proposal.  He looked like an overfedpatent medicine salesmen who earnestly believed in the efficacy and excellence  his product surrounded by a host of less than credulous listeners.As a former Bureaucrat I leaned the iron rule of bureaucracy--grow or wilt!  I do not think the IRS would go quietly into the night.  They have all those files!

The bright young men who went to wall street and came up with all these exotic investment opportunitiesthat were based on dubious assumptions of growth and worth.  Their superiors--also looking at the astonishing commissions available--approved these risky ventures riding the expanding bubble and taking advantage of the reduced oversight that has been a factor in the industry since the 1980's.  Less oversight,more room for risky and  speculative securities.  I do not blame the young men--they were just looking to make fantastic dollars in salary and bonuses.  It is the way the system works except for the fact that the policemen were sitting in the coffee shop--perhaps told to do so.  The dot. com. bust taught no lesson andthe housing debacle followed--it was not the fault of Barney Frank!

The job of the regulators is to police the investors whether they be prudent Prudence or Lance the cowboy.The regulators got bought, sold out, fooled,  defanged,  and ignored and the result is the horrid messthat the whiz kids and their ideological mentors have given us.  Of course capitalism is a wonderful systemand provides unimagined wealth for all, but if it is not regulated you have a situation where the adultsgo to the beach and leave the kids to manage the store.  Police are necessary in the best communitiesas they keep order, prevent us from hurting ourselves and other and allow life to be lived with somedegree of safety.  Only idealistic fools such as Marx and Lenin really believed that man could beraised to a level where he would police himself.  They should have read more Hobbes and less Rousseau.Without regulation the life of your investments is liable to be nasty, brutish and short.  I recall thatwe come from a long line of predatory killer apes  burdened with a territorial imperative we revealthis frequently especially in slow commuter traffic.

Do you recall what the top tax bracket was in the 1950's when we were top dogs?Let me comfort you.  Let us say that the additional surcharge would apply to that sum remaining to you after all other taxes had been paid.  Therefore--if you had an after normal tax income of $500, 000you would pay an additional 1 percent! Feel better now?Remember Willy Sutton?  You have to tax (or rob) where the money is.  The poor do not have it.