by Kane » Wed Jan 02, 2013 12:34 pm
It's not equity in the strictest sense, it's equity in terms of opportunity. This is basically an argument for social mobility.
If you want to charge a $40K household the same rate as a $40 Million household you're significantly affecting social mobility due to the regressive scheme imposed. It doesn't make a lot of sense if the goal is to improve the prospects of the country as a whole. If all you're concerned with is the protection of the wealthy then you're walking down a path to confrontation.