Perhaps due to my incessant optimism about people's reasonableness, the way I understood the argument seems to me to be primarily about the regressive character

Perhaps due to my incessant optimism about people's reasonableness, the way I understood the argument seems to me to be primarily about the regressive character of the tax system. $59k/$44k just isn't that much anymore, especially in a relatively high-cost area, and especially considering the sources of cost inflation he identified. But okay, $59k/44k is one thing. You want to talk about regressive taxes, tell me why I have to pay nearly $2k to employ a part-time person who nets just a little shy of ~$1400 (roughly ~$22k annual gross), and that's without any benefits. Talk about a disincentive for job creation! I'd much rather pay my part-time employee more of that ~$2k, and if I could, I would. If I give him a $300 bonus one month, he's going to see about $180 of it if it's run through the normal payroll withholding mechanisms. At that level of income, that really is ridiculous.