What I appreciate about your response is that you give no figures or percentages. We don't have clue what we would need per taxpayer. I have a hard time having a serious discussion arguing dollar amounts or percentages when none of us have a clue.
It's a little more complex than spitting out numbers without answering numerous questions concerning what we currently spend and what our current revenue is. You want numbers go to the chart I posted, I'd start with immediately returning to the tax rates of 1975 when our GDP was twice what it is now and see how things shake out.
These numbers are somewhat out of date but about 5 years ago there was a surprisingly strong movement to implement a VAT in the US called FairTax.org. I'm not sure if they exist any more. They did some fairly serious calculations and came up with the following.
First, everyone, paupers and billionaires would be given a "prebate" of $25,000 each year, IIRC. Then all other taxes would be revoked and a VAT on ALL purchases would be set at 27%.
They had calculations to show that the 27% would be revenue neutral.
I didn't like it because the wealthy, who put their cash into offshore entities of any type, even buying a French-built yacht would escape the tax. If they included putting the VAT on purchases of investments and offshore purchases it might work but then why not just flat tax ALL income and revenue. Simpler and would amount to the same thing in the end unless people just put their money in a savings account or their mattress.
A flat tax at any rate will never work. The poor will never be able to pay what a flat tax would have to be in order to keep our heads above water and the rich would never be paying enough. A VAT would be a failure because the rich have the luxury of doing all their purchasing from their home in Bermuda or some other place outside the country.
This is what the right has morphed in to. I'm sitting here saying we need to do practically the exact same thing Reagan did and today the right calls me a fascist for saying so. I thought they liked the guy?
well, I was actually looking for hard numbers based on your idea of the classifications - not a textbook description. what are your numbers?
I am a chemist not an economist. Without knowing some hard numbers I can't speculate with hard numbers, that would be kinda stupid. Like I said, start with returning to the tax rates we had in 1975, is that hard enough?