I feel exactly as you do. Flat tax rate, it does keep people wanting to do better. And if a person can't get off of their lazy ass to earn a living, well too damn bad.

What I've earned I my fair share. I don't expect someone else to give up what they've earned for me; I don't "owe" anything to anyone, except my kids, and by that I mean they are owed my time to teach them that their fair share is their own.

I still say limit the Government to $100,000/year and watch the Looters lose interest.

If the government got out of the welfare business? Welfare is big "business" for big government. But if I bite on that principle, the Government should purge all moochers because they have nothing of value to Loot. Welfare is stupid. Stop zoning free enterprise out of existence. Encourage cottage/garage businesses if only to tax them into slavery for the mire thought of attempting capitalism.

They just need to make us all Postal workers by executive order. Ban us from striking and give us cradle to grave security and safety..Then we will all be Government Employees making an average $74,000 rather then the current household average of $50,034. I could do with a raise. I think the proletariat should get another $100,000 to match the ruling Congressional class at $178,00/year right Comrades? Since spending other peoples money is good, we can just keep voting ourselves raises and vacations. We can push for mandatory email and a 2hr work weeks, we have to conserve resources since there won't be anything but former farmers, oil workers or truckers, having all been conscripted to the Postal Service. cadre (Oh ya the new uniform SHORT PANTS and Hawaiian shirts and pink barrettes). (Please don't get upset unless it happens... that was sarcasm or "inflammatory hate speech")

Fair share is another word for equal outcome. I prefer equal opportunity. This is the concept outlined in the Constitution. In the realm of taxes, fair share should be the legitimate Constitutional taxes -- excises, duties and imposts. Those are consumption taxes and not taxes on labor and production. Another way of looking at it is -- The taxes on businesses. When you buy goods and services, you pay the taxes associated with those goods and services.

I would defy anyone that can legitimately show any law in the Internal Revenue Code that says the "average" American is subject to an income tax. There isn't one.

Also to prove that a 1040 form is other than a "Virgin Resident Income Tax Form." When you sign such a form under penalty of perjury you are committing perjury by the very act of signing.

The IRS is the largest group of organized criminals ever and I can't even find where they are a legitimate federal agency or even part of the Treasury Department. They hide under cover of Treasury.

Americans need to study the Constitution and the Federalist Papers to understand what the founders intended and the true meaning of the words they used.

100% Right !!! Sharing is a choice, it's your money to do with what you want, since YOU earned it. I do believe that if everyone had to pay the same exact amount to the government, no matter what your income, the waste of money would stop, everyone has skin in the game. If you don't pay, you get NO services.... If you don't work, you don't eat and if you choose to put yourself out there and be the best you can be, you have great incentive to earn rewards of your choosing without punishment...unlike today's society.

I agree with you. The very concept of fair is something heavily skewed based on individual perspective (as is illustrated in our current culture).

I'm all for sharing if that entails EVERYONE producing (whether that be goods or services) in equal measure - but that will only be the case in an idealized world, one free of the millions of lazy, entitled, irresponsible people that currently infiltrate our world.

In the current system, the ones who pay the most receive the least benefit, and the ones who pay the least receive the most benefit. The people arguing that the "fair share" isn't being paid want to make that disparity grow. Obviously, this is all screwed up.

If the government got out of the welfare business and were only offering essential services (ok - loaded word, we'd have to discuss exactly what this is), we would the majority of the time be paying a user fee for services that would be equal to all, regardless of income.

For example, when I want to mail a letter, they don't determine that my fair price of a stamp is based on how much I make an hour.

Government services (and therefore taxes) would be fairest of all if they were only paid by the people receiving the service, on a flat-rate fee basis.

The whole problem with the fair share arguments is the people making them are completely convinced that "what the government is involved in" is necessary, and the only problem here is to figure out how to pay for it. It would be far fairer to say "who asked you to do that, anyway?", scrap the programs, and reduce government to the point where fee-for-service covers most of it. And in the process of doing this, we'd find I think that private enterprises would do those jobs at lower fees and put the govt out of those jobs.

"Fair Share" is an oxymoron. Another Looter scam.

I feel like I am back in Kansas again. Is the nightmare over finally?

I am with you 100%

Whatever I am willing to accept in return for what I produce. I do not share. I give to those I choose including charity. I trade with others to mutual satisfaction or I look elsewhere. “Fair share” implies a right to a portion of my product, an un-named entity deserving some of my product without offering fair exchange. My “fair share” is all I can honestly acquire.

Whatever I EARN.