[pb7]

>taxes should go to 100% and the government should use the proceeds to provide free services to the population, like education, healthcare, affordable housing and infrastructure

There won't be too many proceeds because people would simply stop working at that point. I'm far from being taxed at 100% (~50% marginal all in) and my motivation to increase my pay is already very low. I optimize for fewer hours worked at the same pay now.

[kevincrane]

> I'm far from being taxed at 100% (~50% marginal all in) and my motivation to increase my pay is already very low.

Do you think that's because you're already making enough money to put you at or near the top tax bracket? Sounds like your lack of motivation is because you're already making enough and don't need more, not that the government might get an extra 8% out of you.

[pb7]

I would definitely work (a bit but not infinitely) more if taxes were significantly lower.

The math is pretty simple. Everyone has 24 hours in a day. I get paid X to work Y hours. My free time Z is 24-Y hours. It's not worth it to trade any more of my remaining Z hours just to have >50% immediately taken away. I don't get any more hours in a day by working more. Instead, I increase my hourly income (the accurate value of my labor) by cutting Y to 1/2 or 1/3 while still making X. I work less, have more free time, and government doesn't make more from my labor than I do. Easy. (Note: If I were to magically find a job that paid twice as much with the same crazy good work-life balance, I would of course take it regardless of marginal taxes. But such magic is hard to come by and not worth the risk at this point.)

Advanced version: on top of the marginal rate being 50%, I live in an expensive place where not only does it get taxed higher as if I'm uber rich, but I get to pay more for all of my expenses. It's like a double fuck you. Even less motivation. This stuff is real and anyone who's in my position has given it some thought even if it's not so formulaic, hence the outflow of people from CA to cheaper, less tax-y places.

[thrashh]

People aren’t moving out of CA to less tax-y places. They’re moving to cheaper places (with less to offer).

There’s a net migration of rich people into CA (and there always has been). It’s the lower income that move out because they simply can’t afford CA. Rich people can afford CA and so they move here.

[pb7]

Many wealthy SWEs are moving to Texas and Florida for reasons that boil down to “no state tax” and “cheaper”, both points I’ve explained the math behind.

This isn’t really a political point. I like living in California (for now) and wouldn’t move to either of the other states just for the savings. Not worth it.

[deanmoriarty]

Great! Let’s put a wealth tax of 10% a year in addition to the 100% marginal tax rate, that will move some asses!

[dalmo3]

Move to another country?

[klipt]

America taxes its citizens globally, so they can't escape just by moving.

[ghufran_syed]

they can, they would just have to give up their citizenship

[pvaldes]

Easily solved investing most of their money into buying a European or Chinese company and putting a trusting non US citizen at charge. Convenience flags are used since decades.

[EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK]

10m+ is not the money you earn by working. It's money you earn by owning something.

[cercatrova]

If you work in tech, you might make 10 million in 30 years or so. What are you owning at that point, stocks? And what's wrong with making money by owning something?

[EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK]

1) After having worked in tech for 30years, value of your stocks/real estate will far exceed the sum of all your salaries received.

2) Nothing wrong, just stating the facts.