To the Editors of the Crimson:

David Feinberg ought to be a politician. His article attacking the proposed value added tax was one of the neatest pieces of demagogy to appear in your pages in recent months.

Throughout his article Mr. Feinberg refers to the value added tax as "regressive," as opposed to the "progressive" income tax. These labels are, technically exactly correct. The problem is that Mr. Feinberg neglected to indicate that these terms have different meanings in economics than in everyday life.

In economics a "progressive" tax is one that is levied with respect to the taxpayer's income; a "regressive" tax is one that is levied irrespective of the taxpayer's income. By failing to define these terms, Mr. Feinberg left himself free to associate "progressive" taxes with progress and social justice while associating "regressive" taxes with Louis XIV.

Mr. Feinberg criticizes Senator Long for saying that our income tax structure is "progressive to the point of being counter-productive." It might interest Mr. Feinberg to know that at present our highest marginal tax rates generate very little revenue. Furthermore, the institution of more progressive tax structures than ours in such countries as England and Sweden has only succeeded in forcing wealthy potential taxpayers to move themselves (and their incomes) to lands with more favorable tax laws. Does Mr. Feinberg seriously want the United States to introduce such a self-defeating system? Ted Higgins '83

David Feinberg responds:

It is easy to apply technical terms such as "progressive" or "regressive" taxes to everyday life. The value-added tax will force poorer people to pay more taxes while relieving giant corporations of much of their own tax burden. That's not theory, it's fact. To say that equitable tax laws create a "self-defeating system" is ridiculous. As my article pointed out, legislators can restructure America's taxes to provide incentives for savings and investments without forcing wealthy tax-payers to leave the United States. The elimination of interest-rate ceilings on bank savings accounts or the establishment tax credits for money saved by consumers are just two possible strategies.