I take issue with you calling something that promotes equality or fairness "regressive". I take issue with people of a certain political persuasion choosing to label their ideas as "progressive" and my ideas as regressive. I hereby opt those labels for myself. I am progressive, my ideals are progressive, my flat tax ideas are progressive - any idea you espouse is hereby regressive.

See how easy it is to manipulate language to give yourself a sense of moral superiority?

Your point is well taken, but inapplicable. In the parlance of economics a tax is progressive if the weight of the tax falls on higher income earners (thereby pushing progressively higher tax rates as you go up the income ladder). A regressive tax is one that falls more heavily on those with lesser incomes (a gasoline tax and a sales tax, unmodified to account for income are examples). These are the terms in general use in the world of economics. They are not my terms.

By its very nature taxation is either progressive or regressive, except at the point of absolute balance. The real test is what level of progressivity or regressivity is inherent in tax policy. For instance, the flat taxers advocate a regressive taxation system with progressive features (like allowing certain items or income to be exempted), while the system we currently have is a progressive system with (mostly) regressive features such as deductions for home mortgage interest, charitable contributions, etc.

You can feel free of course to call my ideas regressive, but these are not my ideas. If you do call me regressive I will be sad and think that you are a big, fat meanie.

I prefer to use the term "graduated" if the weight of the tax increases in proportionality to the thing being taxed (i.e. the constant of proportionality is > 1) Also, in my vocabulary a flat tax is not "regressive" - it is "proportional" (i.e. it's constant of proportionality is 1).

The terms progressive/regressive may be common but the fact that they are irritates me because they are loaded terms. Progressive has a positive connotation to it while regressive has a negative connotation to it. Technical terms without a positive/negative connotation obviously exist (e.g. we can discuss tax rates as having a constant of proportionality greater than, less than, or equal to one) so why aren't they used? In my opinion, the fact that the terms progressive/regressive are in common use among economists (as opposed to technical terms without underlying connotations) does not make them valid. Instead, I consider the common usage of the terms progressive/regressive a testament to politicization and enforcing of ideologies within the field of economics.

I'm on a quest to make my meaning of words be master.

Probably true. Mrs. Cali doesn't like the idea anyways, so that pretty much means it won't happen!

I agree. I wouldn't expand your kitchen if it means sacrificing your living room for a formal dining room. Updating your kitchen though, if it needs it, is usually the best thing you can do to add value to your home.

You are a pinko commie...