3 ms·
The thing about the value of money being roughly logarithmic sent me on a google exploration where I ended up on a suggested "logarithmic flat tax plan". The g
by tunesmith 11y ago
The thing about the value of money being roughly logarithmic sent me on a google exploration where I ended up on a suggested "logarithmic flat tax plan". The gist is, you figure out how many times the poverty rate you make, take the log-base-10, and multiple by some flat constant that is the same for everyone - the result would be your tax rate. Right now in the US that constant would be around 9, assuming the same tax scheme would apply to companies that make billions in profits like Apple and Exxon.
- JoachimSchipper 11y agoSo Alice earning 10x poverty pays 9 (somethings), while Bob earning 100x poverty pays 18 (somethings)? Note that poor Carol earning 1x poverty pays nothing. I'd expect Alice to be rather unhappy with this system. (Also, if someone ever manages to earn 0 in a year, you'll have to give all of the world's wealth to him/her. ;-) )
- tunesmith 11y agoAlice pays 9% of her $117k income. Bob pays 18% of his $234k income. Those are lower tax rates than the present, so not sure why Alice would be unhappy with it. Carol pays nothing. Floor is the poverty rate, so no one makes infinity.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- njonsson 11y agoUnless I’m mistaken, if Alice pays 9% of $117,000 (i.e., $10,530), then Bob pays 11.7% of $234,000 (i.e., $27,400). An 18% tax rate would apply to earners of $1,170,000 (i.e., $210,600 in tax). The high end would be a 63% tax rate applicable to earners of $117 billion (i.e., $73.71 billion in tax).
- tunesmith 11y agoYes, I got 2x and 10x confused, thanks.