3 ms·
I should have compared to progress in the Roman empire just so that I can say that I do not condone aristocracy, only making a point about progress itself. I r
by systemvoltage 4y ago
I should have compared to progress in the Roman empire just so that I can say that I do not condone aristocracy, only making a point about progress itself.
I refuted the points here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31867958 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31867958
- nobody9999 4y agoI have no opinion about what you said that I'm willing to express here, except that you mis-stated the level of income taxes during the period you mentioned. Not an attack on you, just correcting the record.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- systemvoltage 4y agoThanks and correction accepted. Lot of it is still misleading though. We should also clarify that it was the marginal tax rate, not the "tax rate" as we know. Marginal = above a certain threshold. 90% marginal tax rate, but effective tax rate only bit higher than it is today. https://taxfoundation.org/taxes-on-the-rich-1950s-not-high/ https://taxfoundation.org/taxes-on-the-rich-1950s-not-high/