Poll the 70% tax idea, see how it shakes out.

[Eliot Rosewater]

If it polls less than 50% approval, reduce it to 50% and do it again.

Now that the attention is on something many of us have discussed and worked toward since Reagan SLASHED taxes way back when, I say lets use it.

NOW is NOT the time to ALIENATE potential voters per se as in people who would vote for us but now wont because of this idea, but maybe that number is low, we dont know.

Our number one ONLY goal is REMOVE the nazi traitors, but if we could restructure this absurdly ridiculous tax system where the rich run off with everything at the same time, GREAT!

But if it doesnt poll good now, then drop it until the WH is no longer controlled by Russia. Make sense?

[guillaumeb]

1. Conservatives have branded taxes as "takings".

Unless and until we can bring back some reality into our political dialogue, taxes will remain a bad word.

[Eliot Rosewater]

13. Yes, and for the sake of brevity I didnt explain how the 70% ONLY applies on money after

a certain amount and of course not to most people.

But that would have to be explained in detail.

As to the folks who DISREGARD the concerns about now is not the time, must be nice to not have to worry about the consequences of a continued nazi rule.

[guillaumeb]

17. Understood. Marginal tax rates can be confusing for some. eom

[FakeNoose]

2. The system is already skewed to helping the one-percenters

Why shouldn't they pay their fair share of taxes? It's insane that they don't, and also it's unsustainable.

[Eliot Rosewater]

14. Has nothing to do with "should" at the moment, the point is do the people support it and if they

do great.

If they dont and we push it we GUARANTEE risking the WH to nazis.

[0rganism]

3. maybe we also need to find a way to explain marginal rates in 10 words or less

if the 70% and 50% top marginal rates don't poll well, it's probably due to (shall we say) an "information gap".

but i agree - until it does poll well, it needs to drop until certain other high-priority issues are resolved.

meanwhile, get to work on explaining marginal tax rates to the public in 30-second sprints.

[unblock]

6. surtax on surplus income.

don't ever talk about the combined rate, e.g., the 70% tax rate.

instead, each higher tax rate is a sum of the one base tax rate and possibly one or more surtaxes.

so instead of having a 10% bracket and a 12% bracket and a 22% bracket and so on, we say there's a base 10% tax, then a 2% surtax that only applies to income over $9,700, then another surtax of 10% that applies to income over $39,425, etc.

so you're mostly emphasizing the income level that the surtax applies to, and the rates you talk about are only the increments over the lesser surtax. the numbers you talk about are smaller that way, and the emphasis is on the income range.

so by the time you get to the highest tax rate, you're emphasizing the *second million dollars of taxable income* and the surtax is only the increment over the next-highest bracket. even with a single jump it would be about 30% (from 40% to 70%).

adding a 30% surtax on someone's second million dollars sound much more reasonable than a 70% tax rate and then trying to explain what the word "marginal" means.

[0rganism]

10. that's a solid start

imho somehow we need to get the difference between "effective rate" and "marginal rate" parceled out into bite-size chunks, whether using those words or others.

the public has been gaslit for decades by insecure, greedy, irresponsible, wealth-grabbing petty bourgeoisie to believe that what's good for the top 10% is good for the other 90%, and the impact has been both widespread and predictable.

we have a lot of ground to make up.

[Eliot Rosewater]

15. This is key. Likely the same 33% who stilll support the nazi traitor will NEVER listen

so fuck them, obviously, but if the other 67% can UNDERSTAND these basics, we might be able to get there.

[gay texan]

4. Here's the problem

On Facebook my mouth breathing Trump jumpers are claiming that the 70% tax will apply to everybody.

It's only for people who make 10 million a year. They leave that little factoid out on all of their memes.

So by way of the RWNJ rumor mill, the 70% tax is a bad thing

[Eliot Rosewater]

16. I know, but those folks will never do the right thing on any issue because racism and hatred

of the GAY is more important to them, but they are the minority.

[gay texan]

18. I will admit that they are fun to mess with

I push buttons when i'm bored :-D

[Hassin Bin Sober]

20. Call it the "10 million and above tax bracket"

[unblock]

5. it's important to phrase it properly and emphasize the right parts.

it's a *surtax* on the *second million* dollars of taxable income earned, after deductions, in a single year.

people earning as much as one full million dollars of taxable income, after deductions, in a single year, are "too poor" to even be affected by this at all.

only for people earning even more than one million dollars, having the benefit of such incredible income and the first million taxed at the lower rates, the *second* million dollars and beyond has a surtax on it to help reduce the national debt, to help pay for many, many government services that such ultra-high earners benefit from, and reduce the extreme concentration of wealth that has historically led to depressions and revolutions.


stay away from the 70% figure and emphasize *what* is being taxed rather than by how much. if anyone asks, the surtax is 30% (current top rate around 40% + 30% gets you to the 70% figure). the 70% number is the scare figure, it makes people think it applies to them and it seems like too much because they aren't thinking it applies only to a second million dollars that's only fantasy money for them.

[yonder]

7. I like that thinking and the necessity of keeping the explanation of "what", simple.

[Hekate]

8. The average person has no clue of its history or what it means. They've been dumbed down ...

...so far that all they can do,is grunt "Tax Bad!"

[melman]

9. "NOW is NOT the time"

Of course not. Now is never the time.

[unblock]

11. right, now that wealth is even more highly concentrated than in 1929.

definitely not the right time. we should wait for a depression or a revolution first.

[Poiuyt]

12. It would take a massive informational campaign without the Democratic labels

Something that talks about the history and the benefits to the common man

[Mr. Quackers]

19. Nope

you can't negotiate with people who act in bad faith. THEY are the ones who must repent if they want to reclaim a seat at the table of dignity and humanity.

The good should not conform to the evil.

The day of reckoning came in November when the Republicans got their ass stomped in some oftentimes very satisfying ways.

[Eliot Rosewater]

21. Nope? Nope what?

Dont poll it to see if it will either get us elected or give the GOP all branches of government for 10 years?

Or

Dont poll it at again at 50% if 70% fails?