MadisonElliott

Dr.SteffenGuenzel
ENC11020015
31March2015
RhetoricalAnalysisRoughDraft
Most citizens of the United States know they have to pay their taxes each year,
usually in the form of coming directly out of their paychecks and going straight to the
national government. This system has been in play for years and most citizens do not
even bother to ask how much of their income is actually going to the government, or how
their contribution compares to other citizens contributions. This national tax system,
progressive income tax, has been in place since 1913. So, nowadays regular citizens do
not think twice about the system, they just do what they are told. Unaware there are other
taxation methods out there, some which could benefit us far more than the system we
have now.
The national tax system in place now is the progressive income tax.
EdwardB.Hymsonisalawyerwhograduatedwithadoctorateinjurisprudence
andamastersdegreeinlaw.Hymsonisanexperiencedlawyerwhohasoverthirtyyears
ofexperiencebasedinTexasandCalifornia.HisarticlefromtheSouthernJournalLaw,
TheDebateOverReplacingthePresentIncomeTaxwithanAlternativeTaxStructure
isexactlywhatIwaslookingforwhenIfirstbeganmyresearch.Theauthorexplainsthe
mostpopularkindoftaxsystemsAmericacouldhave,howeachsystemwouldwork,and
theprosandconsofeachsystem.Thearticleisstrictlyinformationalandprovidesmuch
detailoneachtopic.Thejournalarticleisbrokenupintoorganizedsectionsand

Elliott2
subsections.Eachnewtopicthatisintroducedhasanewtitle,whichprovidesthereader
withasystemofhowtoreadthepaperandunderstandeachindividualtopic.Thearticle
startswithanintroduction,whichexplainsthereisanongoingdebateaboutwhetherthe
UnitedStatesshouldswitchfromitspresentprogressiveincometaxstructuretoa
consumptiontaxorahybridincometax,andwhetherthetaxstructurechosenshouldbea
flattaxoraprogressivetax(Hymson,Edward).Hethenmovesontoexplainingthe
differenceofincome,consumption,andhybridtaxes.Thesectionfollowingthatexplains
theprosandconsofeachtaxsystemandhowtheywouldwork.Thenextsectiongives
economistsopinionsforeachofthetaxsystemsprovided.Thefifthsectionsexplains
whatproblemswouldoccurifAmericadidswitchfromincometaxestoconsumption
taxes.Afterthemanyhoursofresearchputintothisarticle,theconclusionispretty
simple.Hymsonstatesthereisinsufficientevidencetoconcludethataconsumption
basedtaxisbetterthananincomebasedtax,andviseversa.Sothereisnoreasonto
expectthataconsumptiontaxwilleverbepassed.Heconcludesthearticlebysayingthe
benefitsthatwouldcomefromswitchingtoaconsumptiontaxcanstillbegainedby
simplymodifyingthecurrentincometax.Byshiftingtoahybridtaxwiththecurrent
incometaxstructurewouldofferthemostbenefitwiththeleasttransitionalproblems.
Themainargumentofthetextiswhetheraconsumptiontaxorhybridtaxisbetter
thananincomebasedtaxsystem,andifthetaxshouldbeprogressiveorflat.Mostofthe
articleisstrictlyinformationalandunbiased,becausebeforetheauthorgiveshisopinion
hethoroughlyexplainseachsideoftheargument,displayinghisRogerianstyle
argument.Althoughhegoesthroughthearticlebeunbiasedandfairtoeachpointof

Elliott3
view,heconcludesthearticlebystatinghisopinion.Hymsonbelievesthatfromthe
researchhehasdoneaconsumptiontaxdoesnothaveenoughbenefitstoriskthe
downfallahugeeconomictransitionwouldentail.Butinstead,installingahybridtax
systemwithinthecurrentincometaxsystemwouldprovidethegreatestoutcomeforan
alternativetaxstructure.Toexplainwhatthismeansinsimplerterms,ahybridtaxisa
consumptionandincometaxcombined.Forexample,aconsumptiontaxisataxsystem
thatisstrictlyongoodsandservicesthatoneindividualbuysinayear.Ifacitizenmakes
$100,000fortheirannualincome,butonlyspends$50,000ofit,thentheyonlypaytaxes
for$50,000.Differingfromanincometaxsystemwherethecitizenwouldpaytaxeson
thefull$100,000.Ahybridtaxisacombinationofthetwo;wheretheypaytaxesonthe
$50,000thattheyspent,butalsohavetopaytaxesonthe$50,000thattheysaved.The
taxrateoneach,spentandsaved,wouldbeadjustedtowhereitisafairpaymentfrom
thecitizenbutalsoafairpaymenttothegovernment.Hymsonarguesthatswitchingfrom
thecurrentincometaxsystemtoaconsumptiontaxsystemwouldbetoomuchofashock
ontheeconomy,andthattheeconomywouldnotbeabletohandleitandwouldresultin
turmoil.Overallthearticlepresentsthemainargumentverywell,andthoroughly
explainseachsideoftheargumentwhilebeingcompletelyunbiased.
Withthisarticlebeingnearlythirtypages,itcanbehardforthereadertoknowif
theauthorusedcrediblesourcesorisjustmakingassumptionswiththeinformationheis
giving.Throughouteverytopicofthearticle,theauthorstateswheretheinformation
camefromandsitesitatthebottomofeachpage.Justafewsourceshereferstoare:
senators,theOrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment,howcountriesin

Elliott4
Europehandletaxes,differenttaxesproposedbycongressthroughouttheyears,the
Presidentsadvisorypanelonthefederaltaxreform,anarrayofprofessorswhohold
PhDsintheirfieldsofstudy,theHooverInstitutiononflatconsumptiontaxes,the
currentU.S.incometax,consumptiontheorists,hybridtaxadvocates,researchfellows,
legaldocuments,economicdictionaries,academicjournals,books,andarticlesallbased
onvaryingtaxsystems.ThislistofsourcesisonlythebeginningofwhereHysmongets
hisinformationfrom,andallofthesesourcesareextremelyknowledgeableandcredible.
Whensketchingouttherhetoricalsituationitisgoodtoidentifythelogos,pathos,
andethos.Logosisthelogicusedtosupporttheclaims,orthefactsandstatistics
provided.InthisarticleHymsonstronglyuseslogostoappealtothereader,heuses
definitionsfromdictionaries,legaldocuments,andcasestudiesfromanarrayof
researchers.Hefindsstudiesthathavebeenproposedorconductedthatdeterminehow
differenttaxsystemswouldaffectournationseconomy,andpresentstheseoutcomesto
thereader.Pathosistheemotionalormotivationalappealstheauthortriestoconveyon
thereader.Thisarticleisnotverypathosbased;theauthordoesnotoffermuchvivid
languageorappealtoanysensorydetails.Mostinformationgivenisstrictlystatisticsor
proposedideas.Ethosisthecredibilitytheauthorholds,andwhatauthoritytheymayor
maynothave.Readingthisarticleitisevidentthespeakerusesethostoappealtothe
reader,byonlyusinghighlycrediblesourcesandbackingupanyopinionhemayhave
withfacts.Theentirearticlereliesoncredibleoutsidesources,sobytheendofthepaper
whentheauthorgiveshisopinion,thereaderknowsitisanopiniontheycantrust.

Elliott5
Fromthisarticlethereadercanbelievetheauthorwhenhesaysanentirelynew
taxstructurecouldnotworkwithoureconomy.Withallofthedifferentstudies,
committees,andtimeputintothisfieldofresearch,itcanonlybeconcludedthatwhat
EdwardHymsonsaysistrue.Althoughtherearebenefitsthatcouldcomefroma
consumptionbasedtax,therearetoomanyrisksthatcomewiththetransitionperiod.The
mostbeneficialandleastriskypaththatcanbetakenistomodifyourcurrentincometax
systemintoahybridtaxsystem.Whichwouldcombinecharacteristicsofaconsumption
taxandanincometax.

Elliott6

WorksCited
HYMSON,EDWARDB.1."TheDebateOverReplacingThePresentIncomeTax
WithAnAlternativeTaxStructure."SouthernLawJournal23.2(2013):
181209s.IndextoLegalPeriodicals&BooksFullText(H.W.Wilson).
Web.31Mar.2015.