6 ms·

> Tax billionaires, tax the upper-middle-class, tax profitable corporations, Where do you think our tax revenue is coming from? the 12% tax bracket of someone

> Tax billionaires, tax the upper-middle-class, tax profitable corporations, Where do you think our tax revenue is coming from? the 12% tax bracket of someone making 20k a year in government-subsidized housing, or the 37% tax bracket from someone making $10million a year paying property taxes on their 20 million dollar house? a serious, informed discussion starts with an honest recognition of reality. if you think taxes need to change thats fine, but acting like billionaires and successful companies pay no taxes when they represent the overwhelming majority of tax revenue, you sound like a blind ideologue rather than someone who knows what theyre talking about.

MattGaiser 6y ago
Agreed. The median person is a minimal contributor to government already. https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2018-update/ https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-...
- mistersquid 6y ago
  > The median person is a minimal contributor to government already. The numbers in the linked article are for high-income earners who, yes, paid the majority of Federal Income Taxes. My understanding is that the wealthiest people in the United States pay relatively little tax because their wealth accrues largely through investments not income. In addition to being taxed at a much lower rate than income, such investments also qualify for deductions which often reduce and/or eliminate any final tax obligation.
wlesieutre 6y ago
But also look at where our tax revenue used to come from: > In 1981, Reagan significantly reduced the maximum tax rate, which affected the highest income earners, and lowered the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 50%; in 1986 he further reduced the rate to 28%.
- arcticbull 6y ago
  The top marginal tax rate was in the 90%'s for much of the 1900s. Also, the estate tax was in the 80% range for much of the 1900s, now it's effectively zero. Moving huge quantities of un-earned wealth from generation to generation is a great way to create and maintain inequality.
  - dnautics 6y ago
    I don't think there's any evidence that generational wealth transfer is the cause of income inequality; the major deviation in income inequality began in 1973 with the productivity gap it's only been maybe a generation and change since then and moreover, this was even before Reagan-era tax changes.
    - arcticbull 6y ago
      > I don't think there's any evidence that generational wealth transfer is the cause of income inequality. Well, it was in reference to general inequality. It absolutely creates wealth inequality. If you are born to poor parents, and your buddy Steve inherits a $1M San Francisco apartment from his family, well, Steve has a big head start over you. That directly translates into income equality too, as inherited investments yield 7% returns invested in the S&P, or that $1M apartment generates $3-4000 per month in rent for Steve, while you have nothing. You know what they say, time in the market beats timing the market -- the sooner you have money the more money you will have thanks to geometric returns. Had Steve's family donated that money before they shuffled off this mortal coil, or the state collected it in taxes, that wealth could have been used to raise the minimum standard of living for everyone in the next generation -- not just Steve.
      - wlesieutre 6y ago
        Generational wealth transfer isn't just your inheritance either: > It has not been easy for me. And you know I started off in Brooklyn, my father gave me a small loan of a million dollars. Makes it a bit easier to start a business when you can just ask your parents for a million dollars. Imagine growing up with the idea that a million dollars is a "small loan."
eecc 6y ago
Nope, no blind ideology here. It’s just ridiculous that C-suites and their direct entourage get paid billions (and can afford to buy mansions that used to be the final reward to a successful career with what amounts to pocket money to them) for funneling more and more taxation to tax havens. Plenty of companies live off government subsidy and refuse to pay their share; costing government revenue and forcing it to cut services and squeeze the suckers that don’t have the resources to hide their stash. And seriously, you Americans should ditch company paid health insurance and switch to any of the systems here in Europe...
- asdff 6y ago
  It's also ridiculous to paint any of this like a meritocracy. America is a land of private kings and peasants. There is a finite amount of wealth in the borders of this country, a finite number of jobs, and a finite number of C level positions, and probably a thousand vastly more qualified people for every CEO out there. We don't choose to stratify our wealth based on any intelligence or merit or skill. For every doctor, lawyer, scientist, or business executive making serious money, they aren't there because they crossed some intelligence bar; there would be 1000x as many of these positions if intelligence were the only bar. These knowledge workers we value so much and idolize in society were simply born in the right place at the right time, and opportunities snowballed from there. This is a land of blind luck, highly influenced by who your parents were and what color your skin is.
peterxpark 6y ago
You would also need to account for long term capital gains tax being at most 20% cap which is where much of the wealthy make the bulk of their wealth. And if you have a good accountant then you can easily find ways to even offset this.
jayd16 6y ago
You're jumping to a pretty unsubstantiated conclusion. OP never said the were currently untaxed.

MattGaiser 6y ago

Agreed. The median person is a minimal contributor to government already. https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2018-update/ https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-...

mistersquid 6y ago
> The median person is a minimal contributor to government already. The numbers in the linked article are for high-income earners who, yes, paid the majority of Federal Income Taxes. My understanding is that the wealthiest people in the United States pay relatively little tax because their wealth accrues largely through investments not income. In addition to being taxed at a much lower rate than income, such investments also qualify for deductions which often reduce and/or eliminate any final tax obligation.

wlesieutre 6y ago

But also look at where our tax revenue used to come from: > In 1981, Reagan significantly reduced the maximum tax rate, which affected the highest income earners, and lowered the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 50%; in 1986 he further reduced the rate to 28%.

arcticbull 6y ago
The top marginal tax rate was in the 90%'s for much of the 1900s. Also, the estate tax was in the 80% range for much of the 1900s, now it's effectively zero. Moving huge quantities of un-earned wealth from generation to generation is a great way to create and maintain inequality.
- dnautics 6y ago
  I don't think there's any evidence that generational wealth transfer is the cause of income inequality; the major deviation in income inequality began in 1973 with the productivity gap it's only been maybe a generation and change since then and moreover, this was even before Reagan-era tax changes.
  - arcticbull 6y ago
    > I don't think there's any evidence that generational wealth transfer is the cause of income inequality. Well, it was in reference to general inequality. It absolutely creates wealth inequality. If you are born to poor parents, and your buddy Steve inherits a $1M San Francisco apartment from his family, well, Steve has a big head start over you. That directly translates into income equality too, as inherited investments yield 7% returns invested in the S&P, or that $1M apartment generates $3-4000 per month in rent for Steve, while you have nothing. You know what they say, time in the market beats timing the market -- the sooner you have money the more money you will have thanks to geometric returns. Had Steve's family donated that money before they shuffled off this mortal coil, or the state collected it in taxes, that wealth could have been used to raise the minimum standard of living for everyone in the next generation -- not just Steve.
    - wlesieutre 6y ago
      Generational wealth transfer isn't just your inheritance either: > It has not been easy for me. And you know I started off in Brooklyn, my father gave me a small loan of a million dollars. Makes it a bit easier to start a business when you can just ask your parents for a million dollars. Imagine growing up with the idea that a million dollars is a "small loan."

eecc 6y ago

Nope, no blind ideology here. It’s just ridiculous that C-suites and their direct entourage get paid billions (and can afford to buy mansions that used to be the final reward to a successful career with what amounts to pocket money to them) for funneling more and more taxation to tax havens. Plenty of companies live off government subsidy and refuse to pay their share; costing government revenue and forcing it to cut services and squeeze the suckers that don’t have the resources to hide their stash. And seriously, you Americans should ditch company paid health insurance and switch to any of the systems here in Europe...

asdff 6y ago
It's also ridiculous to paint any of this like a meritocracy. America is a land of private kings and peasants. There is a finite amount of wealth in the borders of this country, a finite number of jobs, and a finite number of C level positions, and probably a thousand vastly more qualified people for every CEO out there. We don't choose to stratify our wealth based on any intelligence or merit or skill. For every doctor, lawyer, scientist, or business executive making serious money, they aren't there because they crossed some intelligence bar; there would be 1000x as many of these positions if intelligence were the only bar. These knowledge workers we value so much and idolize in society were simply born in the right place at the right time, and opportunities snowballed from there. This is a land of blind luck, highly influenced by who your parents were and what color your skin is.

peterxpark 6y ago

You would also need to account for long term capital gains tax being at most 20% cap which is where much of the wealthy make the bulk of their wealth. And if you have a good accountant then you can easily find ways to even offset this.

jayd16 6y ago

You're jumping to a pretty unsubstantiated conclusion. OP never said the were currently untaxed.