3 ms·

I don't mind paying 90% on a top portion of my income. But before we start collecting more money, I'd like to see existing money used wisely. New York City sp

I don't mind paying 90% on a top portion of my income. But before we start collecting more money, I'd like to see existing money used wisely. New York City spends about 30k per homeless. And it's still not possible to walk a couple of blocks in Midtown without stumbling upon a homeless person sleeping rough. New York subway has a budget of 8+ billion. London tube is about 2 billion. I can keep going, but from the above I'm sure if we tax everyone at 101% the government will still manage to run a deficit...

agent008t 8y ago
Given that not a single person here has protested against the idea of a 90% marginal tax rate, but some have expressed concerns about the funds being spent inefficiently, why not impose a voluntary tax on ourselves and agree to donate to charity 90% of earnings over a certain amount? Surely there are some very good charities that do work in the area you are most interested in - e.g. homelessness, educational scholarships, poverty in general? The added bonus is that a society where people voluntarily donate 90% to charity is a much better society than the one where people get taxed. It means a lot more when something is done voluntarily, and it changes the perceptions on the side of the people receiving the help.