General Discussion

Hav

(5,969 posts)

30. Fixating on a specific rate is the wrong approach

Fri Nov 19, 2021, 07:42 PM

Nov 2021

30, 40 or 90% are meaningless without an objective behind it. It totally misses the point for why funds are needed and seems to focus on sticking it to certain people you dislike.

The major consideration should be a society with the best possible outcome for the large majority or possibly all without communities or the country going bankrupt. Choose a rate that helps fund the social programs and infrastructure for that.
The appropriate rate will probably change over time. There's no point in lowering taxes when you see that your city has no money to maintain the streets, bridges or healthcare facilities and there's no need for raising taxes or keeping a high rate when you have surplus after surplus with no programs to spend it on.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

32 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What do you consider a "fair share" that the top 1% should pay in income tax? [View all] OnlinePoker Nov 2021 OP

I would set a threshold at wherever the top 1% falls and no deductions over that Amishman Nov 2021 #1

Even 30% would raise a fortune. LakeArenal Nov 2021 #2

A 45% effective rate. iemanja Nov 2021 #3

I was just about to post 50% Dave says Nov 2021 #29

70% for the first 5 years. Ka-Dinh Oy Nov 2021 #4

91% like under Eisenhower tenderfoot Nov 2021 #5

Nobody Paid 91% ProfessorGAC Nov 2021 #8

10,000 households hit the 91% bracket in 1950 Dave says Nov 2021 #26

Fair Point ProfessorGAC Nov 2021 #27

Force cap gains/losses to be realized annually, bump cap rate to 40%, set min eff. rate at 40% LonePirate Nov 2021 #6

90% marginal rate Dave says Nov 2021 #7

See Post 8 ProfessorGAC Nov 2021 #9

Since taxes are progressive based on the different brackets it's perfectly Nanjeanne Nov 2021 #10

What I pay newdayneeded Nov 2021 #11

Not exactly on point, but I read once that pollsters found that one of the EarnestPutz Nov 2021 #12

51% and progressively greater beyond that. hunter Nov 2021 #13

35% Skittles Nov 2021 #14

Another source of taxation newdayneeded Nov 2021 #15

50% rate for over $1 million mvd Nov 2021 #16

How do you make corporations pay taxes that aren't passed down to the consumers? marie999 Nov 2021 #28

Some of the current Democratic ideas are a start mvd Nov 2021 #32

90% and we'll take 40 years to work our way down from that. Bluethroughu Nov 2021 #17

50% top status bracket. IbogaProject Nov 2021 #18

Treat all income the same Johnny2X2X Nov 2021 #19

Ding ding ding, we have a winner! LastDemocratInSC Nov 2021 #20

The inverse of this: meadowlander Nov 2021 #21

yes IbogaProject Nov 2021 #31

I'd say a minimum rate of 40% over $1m NowISeetheLight Nov 2021 #22

Whatever they were paying in Eisenhower's administration Hekate Nov 2021 #23

This was the go to tax site in the 80s and early 00s Buzz cook Nov 2021 #24

A fair share requires the rich to feel a need to cut elsewhere, as is common at lower incomes sanatanadharma Nov 2021 #25

Fixating on a specific rate is the wrong approach Hav Nov 2021 #30