Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 20, 2014, 10:44:05 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Politics
| |-+  Economics (Moderator: ag)
| | |-+  Preferred Individual Top Income Tax Rate
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Poll
Question: What would be your preferred top income tax rate?
90%   -6 (12.8%)
80%   -2 (4.3%)
70%   -4 (8.5%)
60%   -3 (6.4%)
50%   -12 (25.5%)
40%   -12 (25.5%)
30%   -4 (8.5%)
20%   -4 (8.5%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 47

Author Topic: Preferred Individual Top Income Tax Rate  (Read 1949 times)
Frodo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13607
United States


View Profile WWW
« on: July 07, 2012, 10:22:50 pm »
Ignore

As far as the United States is concerned, what would be your preferred top individual income tax rate? 
Logged

#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15224
United States


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: July 07, 2012, 10:35:11 pm »
Ignore

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

○∙◄☻tπ[╪AV┼cV└
jfern
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31881


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: July 07, 2012, 10:39:53 pm »
Ignore

70% seems fair. The top rate was greater than or equal to that from 1936-1980.
Logged
Marokai Besieged
Marokai Blue
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 16841
United States


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2012, 11:46:02 pm »
Ignore

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

shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11662
Russian Federation


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2012, 11:58:50 pm »
Ignore

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

fezzyfestoon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8287
United States


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: July 08, 2012, 12:23:43 am »
Ignore

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
shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11662
Russian Federation


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 08, 2012, 12:28:18 am »
Ignore

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.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2012, 12:30:49 am by shua, gm »Logged

○∙◄☻tπ[╪AV┼cV└
jfern
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31881


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: July 08, 2012, 12:32:05 am »
Ignore

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.
« Last Edit: July 08, 2012, 12:37:02 am by ○∙◄☻tπ[╪AV┼cV└ »Logged
fezzyfestoon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8287
United States


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: July 08, 2012, 12:34:27 am »
Ignore

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
shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11662
Russian Federation


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 08, 2012, 06:05:19 pm »
Ignore

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
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14538


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: July 08, 2012, 08:44:04 pm »
Ignore

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

A Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative NE Republican with some Left-Libertarian/3rd Way Leanings. Simply, a Rockefeller Republican.

According to one poster, I represent a...

Dying bread of Americans.
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15224
United States


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: July 08, 2012, 09:11:52 pm »
Ignore

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
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14538


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: July 08, 2012, 10:49:48 pm »
Ignore

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

A Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative NE Republican with some Left-Libertarian/3rd Way Leanings. Simply, a Rockefeller Republican.

According to one poster, I represent a...

Dying bread of Americans.
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26905


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: July 09, 2012, 01:59:59 am »
Ignore

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

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
opebo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47609


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: July 09, 2012, 07:16:24 am »
Ignore

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

The essence of democracy at its purest is a lynch mob

t_host1
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 661


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: July 09, 2012, 08:14:30 am »
Ignore

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

Logged

+4.52    -.07

Hatman
EarlAW
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20684
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -4.97, S: -6.00


View Profile WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 09, 2012, 09:42:01 am »
Ignore

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

http://canadianelectionatlas.blogspot.com

Follow me on Twitter @EarlWashburn
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27403
United States


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: July 09, 2012, 02:48:42 pm »
Ignore

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
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8752


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: July 09, 2012, 03:23:51 pm »
Ignore

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


Lunar Eclipse of April 15, 2014 with the star Spica.

If you missed the lunar eclipse on Oct 8, there's a partial eclipse of the Sun on Oct 23 best visible in central and western North America.
Redalgo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2549
United States


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: July 09, 2012, 03:48:14 pm »
Ignore

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

"I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to see realized." ~ Nelson Mandela
Torie
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 27403
United States


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: July 09, 2012, 04:38:12 pm »
Ignore

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
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20684
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -4.97, S: -6.00


View Profile WWW
« Reply #21 on: July 09, 2012, 08:53:12 pm »
Ignore

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

http://canadianelectionatlas.blogspot.com

Follow me on Twitter @EarlWashburn
morgieb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5359
Australia


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: July 10, 2012, 03:23:09 am »
Ignore

50%, though in the States it should be a little higher to solve budgetary problems.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 26905


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

View Profile
« Reply #23 on: July 10, 2012, 03:33:07 am »
Ignore

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

This place really has become a cesspool of degenerate whores...

Economic score: +0.9
Social score: -2.61

In MN for fantasy stuff, member of the most recently dissolved centrist party.
So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!
Rockingham
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 526


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: July 10, 2012, 05:51:55 am »
Ignore

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 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines