[specialist]

Whatever it takes to restore 1960s level of inequity.

By whatever measure works, eg old school gini coefficient or something more modern.

You're right though: food fights over decimal points and gaming the rules nicely obfuscates any constructive debate about what kind of society we want.

[refurb]

Your answer begs the question - why is the 1960’s the right target?

And if the Gini coefficient is calculated pre-tax and pre-benefit distribution, it’s not going to change with high taxes and high redistribution (and yes you mentioned it may not be the right measure).

And if the Gini coefficient is calculated based on income data from the US, do we know if the better Gini from 1960’s wasn’t just due to income not being reported to the IRS?

[specialist]

> why is the 1960’s the right target?

Realpolitik. Proper Nordic levels of (lesser) inequity is not likely in the USA. But selling the nostalgia of our '60s era prosperity might fly.

> if the Gini coefficient is calculated pre-tax

Firstly, then pick a different different metric. Gini coefficient is merely the most familiar.

Secondly, you asked about proper income tax rate. In my pithy reply, I implied outcomes are more important than implementation details, but slap fights (like this one) about those details are used to distract. (I think the kids today call that "bike shedding".)

Also, I did not explicitly state that measures of wealth distribution is the central issue. I regret the omission.

--

While I have your attention: How do you think our tax regime should be structured?

Feel free to link to any prior explanations (posts) I may have missed, so you don't have to repeat yourself.