Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because the only income thats taxed at 75% is the amount ABOVE that limit, so no matter what you are still making more money.
I understand that. However, that componant at which someone is taxed 75% is not worth earning. What does one do? Simply take more time off and keep one's income well below that rate of taxation.
A 75% rate is servitude to the government. It would be insane for anyone to work for income at that level. Again, I have cut my income EVEN NOW at rates just over 50%, as it is unjust for the government to take over 50% of ANYONE'S INCOME.
Are we working for ourselves, or are we serfs for the federal government. If 75%, why not 100%?
I understand that. However, that componant at which someone is taxed 75% is not worth earning. What does one do? Simply take more time off and keep one's income well below that rate of taxation.
A 75% rate is servitude to the government. It would be insane for anyone to work for income at that level. Again, I have cut my income EVEN NOW at rates just over 50%, as it is unjust for the government to take over 50% of ANYONE'S INCOME.
Are we working for ourselves, or are we serfs for the federal government. If 75%, why not 100%?
Really? Im at the top end of the income tax brackets, even at 75% that money would be worth earning, you could argue about wether I would be willing to put in 50 or 40 hours I suppose-at a 75% effective tax rate (which BTW has NEVER occurred) Id still be making well over minimum wage (even the higher one thats suggested) take home.
And heres the important thing. a large portion of my income I earn in that first 30-40 hours goes towards survival making that last bit free and clear money, even if highly taxed. That make sense? My disposable income is very small-with the vast majority of it being the higher taxed income.
As for 50%? Thats for the middle class, not the rich. And even then its VERY rare for all of a persons taxes to become a effective 50%. I'm probably one of the ones closest to it. Funny thing that huh? And a 75% rate would not be government servitude no matte how much you declare it to be, that is wordsmith nonsense.
And would I pay a 50% effective rate? Well yeah. Im not that far from it. My personal ideas of good governance would be a 50% effective for everyone to fund a guaranteed minimum income that wasn't means tested. But thats just me.
It is NOT unjust to take 50% of anyones income. Thats also wordsmithing. unjust is taking anything from someone whose income is needed to not be in poverty, you know-like taking social security from those making minimum wage, but NOT from any income over 112K. Thats more unjust. But "just" may be a personal viewpoint. Mine obviously differs from you.
PS-why not 100%? Another extremist method of arguing. its nonsensical. Its like saying if 70 degrees F is good for you why not 700? I find this sort of argument foolish.
Yes, the United States from 1935 to 1980...essentially.
The top marginal rate on income was 70-90%, capital gains was ~25%, and corporate while anywhere from 30-50% had so many loopholes it may as well have been flat 15%..
The top marginal rate is meaningless.
The actual rate people pay is the only number that has value.
I would think 5/17/25 percent flat tax. Everyone would pay at least 5 percent tax on all income no matter where they get it from...i.e. stocks, dividends, etc...
Sigh. Maybe we should wage war on the countries that do this, to free their oppressed rich folks!
Maybe someone should come rob you. But it's cool; he's only going to take half the money out of your wallet.
The money I earn is through MY toil and effort, and you are not entitled to it. I don't give a **** what kind of b.s. program you want it to go to. Get your goddamned hands out of my pockets!
Really? Im at the top end of the income tax brackets, even at 75% that money would be worth earning, you could argue about wether I would be willing to put in 50 or 40 hours I suppose-at a 75% effective tax rate (which BTW has NEVER occurred) Id still be making well over minimum wage (even the higher one thats suggested) take home.
And heres the important thing. a large portion of my income I earn in that first 30-40 hours goes towards survival making that last bit free and clear money, even if highly taxed. That make sense? My disposable income is very small-with the vast majority of it being the higher taxed income.
As for 50%? Thats for the middle class, not the rich. And even then its VERY rare for all of a persons taxes to become a effective 50%. I'm probably one of the ones closest to it. Funny thing that huh? And a 75% rate would not be government servitude no matte how much you declare it to be, that is wordsmith nonsense.
And would I pay a 50% effective rate? Well yeah. Im not that far from it. My personal ideas of good governance would be a 50% effective for everyone to fund a guaranteed minimum income that wasn't means tested. But thats just me.
It is NOT unjust to take 50% of anyones income. Thats also wordsmithing. unjust is taking anything from someone whose income is needed to not be in poverty, you know-like taking social security from those making minimum wage, but NOT from any income over 112K. Thats more unjust. But "just" may be a personal viewpoint. Mine obviously differs from you.
PS-why not 100%? Another extremist method of arguing. its nonsensical. Its like saying if 70 degrees F is good for you why not 700? I find this sort of argument foolish.
By your diction, you are not a fellow "1%er". Do I pay 50% in income taxes? Yes- I am in the top federal bracket and live in one of the highest taxed states in the US. Couple that with the medicare/social security and property taxes and YES- I pay OVER 50%.
If you would work for 25% of what you earn, then you apparently do not value your labor very much. That would be peanuts and not worth putting forth the effort. I know of NO ONE who would work at that tax rate. Most of us who make over $750K per year do not need additional W-2 income and could live without it.
I personally at a 50% rate have already cut my income. That is not speculation about what one MIGHT do (as you are describing with a 75% rate, which I think you are lying about), but what I have already done.
Income taxes over 50% is SERVITUDE-to claim otherwise is idiocy. Does one who owns 51% of a company not effectively OWN the company? Does one who owns 51% of one's labor essentially OWN THE WORKER? Of course!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
