4 ms·
Its the same thing with the upper tax brackets. People point to the 50's and say "look we taxed the rich at a much higher rate!!1" but what they miss is that th
by tomschlick 6y ago
Its the same thing with the upper tax brackets. People point to the 50's and say "look we taxed the rich at a much higher rate!!1" but what they miss is that there were so many loopholes that the rich didnt pay anywhere near that rate.
Loopholes are the lifeblood of corps / billionaires. No one will fix them though because thats where their campaign contributions come from.
- bigfudge 6y agoIn the UK at least this isn’t actually true. The studies done use tax records to estimate effective tax rates, not just published tax rates.
- toyg 6y agoThe rich paid more in the ‘50s, because the alternative (the USSR) was worse. Moving money was slow and risky; if you parked your cash in a friendly Caribbean island, there were no guarantees that tomorrow that island would not see a Moscow-backed revolution and your stash would go up in smoke. Nowadays the world is largely stable. Running conflicts are largely ethnic in nature, hence limited to specific areas. Capital is welcome everywhere, and you can move money in and out of a country with a click. So it makes sense for the rich to shop around, like we do when buying insurance through a comparison website.