I too didn't know this, not that I have any decent knowledge of economics/business in the first place :(

One thing that I wish more people (including me) realize is - these big problems (taxation, immigration, protectionism etc) have multiple angles and many nuances to them, and it is just dumb to reduce them to a simple yes/no type binary question. All this to say, many people including those shouting at each other on television, probably don't know enough to argue one way or the other

I’m not trying to be divisive—I myself align with the left on having a robust welfare state. But the right doesn’t want a welfare state at all, it’s not incumbent on them to figure out a realistic way of paying for one.

MMT? With disinflation reigning over most of my adulthood I suspect the fear of deficit spending was and continues to be oversold.

> ...I'm not sure why it has to be couched it divisive left-right rhetoric

The right has been floating flat and simplified tax schemes for decades, including consumption taxes. For example, Hermain Cain made a 9-9-9 Plan a central policy of his campaign.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/9%E2%80%939%E2%80%939_Plan

Floating for decades, but they were controlling the senate, the congress, and the presidency, and I have yet to see it enacted.

Guess which President Trumps aren't particularly interested in substantial policy reform as much as picking fights on irrelevant cultural issues.

Aren’t consumption taxes generally regressive?

for "regressive" and "progressive" to mean something useful, you need to take into account what the tax proceeds are used for. if a mildly regressive tax is used exclusively to fund healthcare for the poor, it's probably not regressive in the end. if a highly progressive tax is used exclusively to finance wars for the elite, it is probably not progressive in whole.

If imposed at a blanket level, then yes. But zero-rating some items (e.g. food, housing) and higher-rating others (yachts, private jets, ...) can address that to a certain extent.

Or what Canada does, which is rebate over the year based on your income level and assumed consumption.

The are usually offset by either multiple consumption tax rates (luxury vs necessary goods like food, toilet paper, etc) or income tax deductions in the lower brackets. Either by excluding taxes at lower income or by subsidies for those groups.

I favor a minimum income and/or earned income tax credit to offset.