3 ms·

> If one means to say highest maximum tax rate, just say it. No weasel interpretations. To be fair, when people criticize the tax rate, be it state or federal,

> If one means to say highest maximum tax rate, just say it. No weasel interpretations. To be fair, when people criticize the tax rate, be it state or federal, it is usually implied they are referencing the highest tax rate. Apples to apples, it’s a rough but fairly accurate proxy for relative so called “tax burden.” One would expect states with roughly equivalent highest tax rates to scale their tax rates about the same as income goes down.

seanmcdirmid 5y ago
> One would expect states with roughly equivalent highest tax rates to scale their tax rates about the same as income goes down. That is incredibly stupid. Someone (single) in Alabama making $40k/year is paying 4.07% effective state income tax rate, in California they are just paying 2.37%. States with lower top tax rates are usually more regressive than states with higher top tax rates, red southern states being the main example of states with regressive taxation.
- CyberRabbi 5y ago
  > That is incredibly stupid. Someone (single) in Alabama making $40k/year is paying 4.07% effective state income tax rate, in California they are just paying 2.37%. This actually validates my point. 40K in Alabama goes a lot farther than 40K in California, based on differences in average cost of living. Just look at relative gas prices. Why are you so hostile? You shouldn’t bully fellow commenters on HN.
  - seanmcdirmid 5y ago
    That wasn’t the argument being made. The one stated that higher top tax rates mean higher low tax rates as well is false, the converse is true. Alabama is nearly last in everything for a good reason. That Californians have a much longer life expectancy (with correspondingly lower obesity rates and fewer health problems) shows that there is more to measuring COL than just what people can buy. I only pointed out that the assumption that higher top tax rates meant higher bottom tax rates as well is incredibly stupid, if anything, the converse is true (higher top tax rates usually mean lower bottom tax rates, not higher).
    - CyberRabbi 5y ago
      > The one stated that higher top tax rates mean higher low tax rates as well is false That actually wasn’t the argument being made. Which I think is why you keep validating my point. You can reread what I wrote to verify.

seanmcdirmid 5y ago

> One would expect states with roughly equivalent highest tax rates to scale their tax rates about the same as income goes down. That is incredibly stupid. Someone (single) in Alabama making $40k/year is paying 4.07% effective state income tax rate, in California they are just paying 2.37%. States with lower top tax rates are usually more regressive than states with higher top tax rates, red southern states being the main example of states with regressive taxation.

CyberRabbi 5y ago
> That is incredibly stupid. Someone (single) in Alabama making $40k/year is paying 4.07% effective state income tax rate, in California they are just paying 2.37%. This actually validates my point. 40K in Alabama goes a lot farther than 40K in California, based on differences in average cost of living. Just look at relative gas prices. Why are you so hostile? You shouldn’t bully fellow commenters on HN.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
  That wasn’t the argument being made. The one stated that higher top tax rates mean higher low tax rates as well is false, the converse is true. Alabama is nearly last in everything for a good reason. That Californians have a much longer life expectancy (with correspondingly lower obesity rates and fewer health problems) shows that there is more to measuring COL than just what people can buy. I only pointed out that the assumption that higher top tax rates meant higher bottom tax rates as well is incredibly stupid, if anything, the converse is true (higher top tax rates usually mean lower bottom tax rates, not higher).
  - CyberRabbi 5y ago
    > The one stated that higher top tax rates mean higher low tax rates as well is false That actually wasn’t the argument being made. Which I think is why you keep validating my point. You can reread what I wrote to verify.