5 ms·
> The preschool measure is a 1.5% tax on incomes of more than $125,000 per year and joint filings topping $250,000. More like taxing the professional class
by umeshunni 6y ago
> The preschool measure is a 1.5% tax on incomes of more than $125,000 per year and joint filings topping $250,000.
More like taxing the professional class
- sibeliuss 6y agoThe professional class will barely even notice.
- leetcrew 6y ago1.5% is a quite a lot for a specific state tax. oregon already levies a 9.9% tax on incomes over $125k. this is a ~15% increase to the highest bracket.
- headmelted 6y agoSo $1,875 per annum on a $250k income. That’s some mighty good value pre-school. Who wouldn’t take that deal?
- neolog 6y agoPeople without kids in preschool
- wcchandler 6y agoI wouldn't mind paying this, for the greater good of the local community.
- stronglikedan 6y agoMaybe limiting the tax to families who claim children as dependents would seem more fair.
- dpcx 6y ago"So let me explain why I like to pay taxes for schools, even though I don't personally have a kid in school: It's because I don't like living in a country with a bunch of stupid people." - John Green
- headmelted 6y agoThis. It seems like a small price to pay not to have half an electorate believe political rivals are child-abducting lizard people.
- tekknik 6y agoSo brainwashed into believing one side? Why can’t we just want to make kids smarter instead of brainwashing them into being liberals?
- headmelted 6y agoI was agreeing with you unless you believe in lizard people.
- tekknik 6y agoyup you’re right, my head was melted when i read the chain last time. re-reading it now i dunno what i was thinking.
- stronglikedan 6y agoStupid people both amuse me, and give me their money, so I don't really see a downside here.
- wolco2 6y agoThat is a fairly large amount. At least $2000 dollars for a childless single person. Or at least $4000 for a childless couple trying to in-vitro. Is pre-school valuable or is it a babysitter?
- bird_monster 6y agoWell, either is fine, in that it allows people with low income a childcare option at all.
- lukevp 6y agoWhere did you get these #s from? This is a progressive tax and only affects income above the threshold. If you make 150k as a single earner, you don’t pay 1.5% on 150k, you pay 1.5% on 150k-125k, or 1.5% of 25k which is $375. And that’s if you didn’t reduce your income in other ways (401k contributions, pretax health or child care, HSA, etc.)
- vasco 6y agoWhere do you propose people leave their kids at when both parents need to work?
- umeshunni 6y agoAt a pre-school they pay for.
- McWobbleston 6y ago
- lastofus 6y agoI believe the cutoffs are for taxable income, not gross.
- vmception 6y agoDon’t you know, we’re “the rich” and get to deflect attention from the actual capital class
- thehappypm 6y agoBuy real estate in Vancouver, WA now. That 0% income tax is gonna look mighty nice.
- NormenNomen 6y agoYou know I've lived in a place with 0% income taxes and the people it attracts are wholly worth paying to move away from.
- thehappypm 6y agoLike the awful people of Seattle? Or Nashville? Or Miami?
- driverdan 6y agoOr Austin, Houston, Dallas, El Paso, etc
- NormenNomen 6y agoI mean, yes? What's your point? Vancouver, WA is a nice town, too.
- RankingMember 6y agoMy experience differs: The higher end places I've lived had 0% income tax (because the wealthy had the means to work within the system to keep it that way), while I've lived in some pretty crappy places with surprisingly high income taxes.
- tekknik 6y agoIsn’t this 100% opinion? It’s equivalent to saying a republican is miserable living in blue country. 0% income tax is likely a red state and you sound like a dem. Of course you wouldn’t like it.