Preferred Individual Top Income Tax Rate
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 18, 2024, 11:47:10 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Economics (Moderator: Torie)
  Preferred Individual Top Income Tax Rate
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: What would be your preferred top income tax rate?
#1
90%
 
#2
80%
 
#3
70%
 
#4
60%
 
#5
50%
 
#6
40%
 
#7
30%
 
#8
20%
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 48

Author Topic: Preferred Individual Top Income Tax Rate  (Read 5765 times)
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,503
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 07, 2012, 10:22:50 PM »

As far as the United States is concerned, what would be your preferred top individual income tax rate? 
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,279
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 07, 2012, 10:35:11 PM »

It seems wrong for the government to take the majority of wealth of any man under taxes. So I put 40.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,569


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 07, 2012, 10:39:53 PM »

70% seems fair. The top rate was greater than or equal to that from 1936-1980.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2012, 11:46:02 PM »

I feel like I've seen this question asked a million times, but 60-70%. The issue for me is not the rates themselves, necessarily, but the amount of brackets and how progressive the overall income tax system is. Right now, it's not very.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,658
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2012, 11:58:50 PM »

30%. If you reduce tax expenditures, this could bring in more revenue than currently even though the rate is lower.
Logged
fezzyfestoon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,204
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 08, 2012, 12:23:43 AM »

30%. If you reduce tax expenditures, this could bring in more revenue than currently even though the rate is lower.

That has never and will never happen. It's just an untruth at this point. A novel concept that has been proven time and again to be inaccurate.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,658
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 08, 2012, 12:28:18 AM »
« Edited: July 08, 2012, 12:30:49 AM by shua, gm »

30%. If you reduce tax expenditures, this could bring in more revenue than currently even though the rate is lower.

That has never and will never happen. It's just an untruth at this point. A novel concept that has been proven time and again to be inaccurate.
How so? The Simpson-Bowles Commission suggested an even lower rate. There are plenty of generous deductions and credits out there that go to high income earners. There's just not the political will to reform them.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,569


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 08, 2012, 12:32:05 AM »
« Edited: July 08, 2012, 12:37:02 AM by ○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ »

30%. If you reduce tax expenditures, this could bring in more revenue than currently even though the rate is lower.

That has never and will never happen. It's just an untruth at this point. A novel concept that has been proven time and again to be inaccurate.
How so? The Simpson-Bowles Commission suggested an even lower rate. There are plenty of generous deductions and credits out there that go to high income earners. There's just not the political will to reform them.

Well, obviously there are plenty of deductions that need to be gotten rid of. Romney can deduct mortgage interest, but someone making $75k can't deduct student loan interest? Ridiculous.

Anyways, obviously taxing capital gains the same as earned income would raise a ton of taxes.
Logged
fezzyfestoon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,204
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 08, 2012, 12:34:27 AM »

30%. If you reduce tax expenditures, this could bring in more revenue than currently even though the rate is lower.
That has never and will never happen. It's just an untruth at this point. A novel concept that has been proven time and again to be inaccurate.
I dunno. The Simpson-Bowles Commission suggested an even lower rate. There are plenty of generous deductions and credits out there that go to high income earners. There's just not the political will to reform them.

No, no, nevermind. I was thinking of something else.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,658
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 08, 2012, 06:05:19 PM »

30%. If you reduce tax expenditures, this could bring in more revenue than currently even though the rate is lower.
That has never and will never happen. It's just an untruth at this point. A novel concept that has been proven time and again to be inaccurate.
I dunno. The Simpson-Bowles Commission suggested an even lower rate. There are plenty of generous deductions and credits out there that go to high income earners. There's just not the political will to reform them.

No, no, nevermind. I was thinking of something else.
Yeah, I can see how my terminology could be misunderstood.  Lowering the top individual income tax rate by itself from where it is now isn't going to increase revenue (though a case might be made for the corporate rate, but even that is far from certain).
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 08, 2012, 08:44:04 PM »

It seems wrong for the government to take the majority of wealth of any man under taxes. So I put 40.

Just because the top marginal rate could be >50% doesn't necessarily mean the income tax robs one of the majority of his wealth.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,279
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: July 08, 2012, 09:11:52 PM »

It seems wrong for the government to take the majority of wealth of any man under taxes. So I put 40.

Just because the top marginal rate could be >50% doesn't necessarily mean the income tax robs one of the majority of his wealth.

Well a majority of yearly income. Tongue
Logged
bullmoose88
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,515


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: July 08, 2012, 10:49:48 PM »

It seems wrong for the government to take the majority of wealth of any man under taxes. So I put 40.

Just because the top marginal rate could be >50% doesn't necessarily mean the income tax robs one of the majority of his wealth.

Well a majority of yearly income. Tongue

Or the majority of his/her income.  It can, but we'd have to know more about that person's yearly income and the actual tax rates etc.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,767


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: July 09, 2012, 01:59:59 AM »

I think there is a general consensus that tax rates above 50% don't really generate any revenue. I guess that if one really loves redistribution it can still make sense to support it though.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: July 09, 2012, 07:16:24 AM »

I think there is a general consensus that tax rates above 50% don't really generate any revenue. I guess that if one really loves redistribution it can still make sense to support it though.

Precisely!  Which is why my top rate would be, in a sense, 100%.
Logged
t_host1
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: July 09, 2012, 08:14:30 AM »

25 and 10, everyone pays the same amount on their accrued adjusted income.

Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,968
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: July 09, 2012, 09:42:01 AM »

How much does the highest salaried person make? Whatever % would leave that person with 200k/year sounds good. No one needs more than that amount.
Logged
Torie
Moderator
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,047
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: July 09, 2012, 02:48:42 PM »

How much does the highest salaried person make? Whatever % would leave that person with 200k/year sounds good. No one needs more than that amount.

So you want a marginal tax rate of 100% for income in excess of 200K per year?
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,778


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: July 09, 2012, 03:23:51 PM »

How much does the highest salaried person make? Whatever % would leave that person with 200k/year sounds good. No one needs more than that amount.

So you want a marginal tax rate of 100% for income in excess of 200K per year?

Sounds like the Occupy plan. A hard cap on income from all sources is needed mathematically to achieve the wealth disparity reduction they espouse.
Logged
Redalgo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,681
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: July 09, 2012, 03:48:14 PM »

50% would be my preferred individual top income tax rate, if all else was just as I want it to be. In a country like the United States I would be willing to go higher only for redistributive purposes.
Logged
Torie
Moderator
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,047
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: July 09, 2012, 04:38:12 PM »

How much does the highest salaried person make? Whatever % would leave that person with 200k/year sounds good. No one needs more than that amount.

So you want a marginal tax rate of 100% for income in excess of 200K per year?

Sounds like the Occupy plan. A hard cap on income from all sources is needed mathematically to achieve the wealth disparity reduction they espouse.

It would be a great way to turbocharge the barter system. Tongue

On a side note, when Ingmar Bergman realized that his marginal tax rate in Sweden was 101%, he emigrated. Smiley
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,968
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: July 09, 2012, 08:53:12 PM »

How much does the highest salaried person make? Whatever % would leave that person with 200k/year sounds good. No one needs more than that amount.

So you want a marginal tax rate of 100% for income in excess of 200K per year?

I guess that's one way of looking at it. But, I would only say approaching 100%, but never at. Cheesy
Logged
morgieb
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,612
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: July 10, 2012, 03:23:09 AM »

50%, though in the States it should be a little higher to solve budgetary problems.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,767


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: July 10, 2012, 03:33:07 AM »

How much does the highest salaried person make? Whatever % would leave that person with 200k/year sounds good. No one needs more than that amount.

So you want a marginal tax rate of 100% for income in excess of 200K per year?

Sounds like the Occupy plan. A hard cap on income from all sources is needed mathematically to achieve the wealth disparity reduction they espouse.

It would be a great way to turbocharge the barter system. Tongue

On a side note, when Ingmar Bergman realized that his marginal tax rate in Sweden was 101%, he emigrated. Smiley

He was actually arrested by the police in the middle of a rehearsal at the theatre. Then he left the country in protest. Astrid Lindgren, author of Pippi Longstocking and other children stories, wrote a story about the 100%+ tax rates she was paying, which is often credited with contributing to the centre-right finally winning in 1976.

I don't fully understand why people think equality is so important that it is preferable to make everyone poorer just to achieve it.
Logged
So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!
Rockingham
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: July 10, 2012, 05:51:55 AM »

Firstly I want to know the situation re tax credits.

Secondly I want to know the situation re taxes other then income taxes.

Assuming both are identical to the present situation in America... probably no lower then 40%, maybe 50%. At the same time I'd be increasing the tax rates on the middle class... because mathematically speaking you can't levy enough money through income taxes on the top few percent to make a dent in the deficit... the middle class is where most of the income is.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.063 seconds with 14 queries.