[throwawayfire]

> Your comment sounds like a rationalization from a middle/upper income person.

In most countries that I am aware of, the tax rate becomes essentially flat at, or relatively close to, a median income.

If you tax people on a lower income at that same rate, then that is highly punitive and is likely to put people into poverty.

It's immediately advantageous for governments to set a "progressive" lower tax rate, to avoid paying the cost of resources dealing with poverty.

Aside from this, governments are continuing to tax people up to and approaching median incomes at the highest rate that they can bear.

It's only once you get significantly above median that the tax rate doesn't continue to be punitive - for example, in terms of young people being able to access security of housing.

I'd argue these [existing tax schemes] aren't therefore progressive at all. It's just a different mechanism to provide minimal/essential support to people in poverty.