| >>That is a different kind of "rich". It's "I can buy a full news studio if I want"-rich. There are 3 problems with that. 1. Even if you took 100% of their wealth, no income, their entire wealth, it would not even pay the interest on the debt. Let alone anything meaningful 2. You still have not defined "the rich" I want a number. 1 Billion? 10 Billion? 100 Billion? Give me an income or even wealth number.. 3. It is not actually true. And it is easily proven as we have a few example. The most famous was Bernie. He was always "Millionaires and Billionaires do not pay their fair share" until he became a millionaire then just like that is was "Billionaires do not pay their fair share". Then you have many champagne socialists on YT spending millions on homes, cars, etc all talking about how the "rich do not pay their fair share" and ofcourse they are not the rich >>And most of them are paying much less taxes over their income than you or I, in percentage. Playing with the tax rates is not going to change that, in fact most of them increasing the tax rates will cause a inverse in collections as it becomes more profitable to evade.. If you look at the amount of revenue the IRS collects from Income tax as a percent of GDP it is almost a flat line, it does not matter what the rate it, the IRS ends up collecting about the same amount. >>Such a tax can never reach 110% Sure it can, in a number of ways because it is not a single taxing entity, State, Federal, Local.. They do not have to allow you to deduct the taxes you paid to the other entities, infact that is a big issue today with the SALT limits. Then you have people proposing WEALTH based taxes, which could exceed the actual income a person made if they are asset heavy and income light. > it can go to 70% or 80%, but it would be orders of magnitude more, in absolute numbers. But as I said, none of them pays that. They'd rather provoke a war than pay that. No Shit, that is just strait up theft. I dont know how anyone could even begin to justify 50+%.. I am opposed to income based taxation in the first place, but Shit 80%? really. So I am left to ask. 1. Please define "Rich" in a actual dollar amount 2. Please define what you believe is a "fair" marginal rate for all income based taxation (state, federal, and local) for a person making this "rich" income. 3. If the government cannot collect the amount if needs to pay for goods and service how or (who) do you propose they make up the difference? |
Income tax is fairly worthless when it comes to the actually rich.