3 ms·

It's really fun to go back through historical marginal tax rates (you'd have to adjust for inflation yourself in this link [1]) and see just how un-taxed the we

It's really fun to go back through historical marginal tax rates (you'd have to adjust for inflation yourself in this link [1]) and see just how un-taxed the wealthy really are today. No wonder dynastic wealth is so prevalent. Tbh, I think we need more gradations and income above $1M should be taxed at rates in excess of 70%. [1] https://taxfoundation.org/historical-income-tax-rates-brackets/ https://taxfoundation.org/historical-income-tax-rates-bracke...

unstatusthequo 4y ago
In what world is $500k as a couple “wealthy?” You have to be joking. Taxing 70%? That’s a sure fire way to have your precious tax donkeys leave the country. Then who will pay for everyone who doesn’t want to work? It’s this mentality that makes me not want to visit HN anymore.
- cmmeur01 4y ago
  What world are you living in where 500k/year isn’t wealthy?
  - unstatusthequo 4y ago
    For two people. A world called California (which we left for Florida) with 39% top fed tax rate, something like 14% state/city/block tax, high property tax, high sales tax, etc. Am I the only one here who thinks sending off a huge portion of what I make is not really worth it? California was nice. But it’s not worth working another 5-10 years for the privilege. Don’t worry I’ll come back to California in 15 years when I have zero income and only property. If there’s water left.
    - metadat 4y ago
      You sound privileged, greedy, ungrateful, and out of touch with reality. Without society and government, you can expect fewer opportunities to prosper and live a nice, comfy, insulated little life.
    - solardev 4y ago
      I'm so sorry you had to buy one fewer yacht this year.
    - medvezhenok 4y ago
      For a couple making 500K and maxing out their 401Ks, the effective tax rate (state+federal) is 24% in Florida and 31.2% in San Francisco, CA. Which results in post tax (and post 401K) incomes of 340K (FL) and 305K (SF), or around a 10% difference in post-tax salary. You can verify this yourself on SmartAsset: https://smartasset.com/taxes/income-taxes https://smartasset.com/taxes/income-taxes
- jdavis703 4y ago
  I don’t consider myself wealthy, and I make less than half that… But I’m also not poor. I have no problem chipping in or 1 or 2 percent more if it means keeping the masses from revolution… As happened to my step mom’s parents in the Chinese cultural revolution.
- ldjkfkdsjnv 4y ago
  Yup same thoughts here... add in a mortgage, school loans, children, expensive cost of living, a few vacations, the rest in a college fund, and some left for savings/investing. Dwindles very fast.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- boomboomsubban 4y ago
  >In what world is $500k as a couple “wealthy?” You have to be joking. It's 7x the median household income.
  - medvezhenok 4y ago
    Slight correction - it makes more sense to compare post-tax incomes, so it's closer to 5.25x the median. Still basically on the cutoff of top 1% (I believe the cutoff is 600K nominal).
- upsidesinclude 4y ago
  You're clearly so far out of touch with reality that your contributions aren't beneficial anyway. I don't mean to be rude about it, but it's kind of bizarre. That is certainly well beyond the household average in the US, which is still below 100k. So, yes, most people consider >5x average annual household income to be lumped with "wealthy". Haha, that's two People, each making 20k per month. Being so totally immersed in your own chase with the Joneses to miss that verges on comedic were it not so insulting.
- solardev 4y ago
  How is that NOT wealthy? US household median income is around $70k. In 2022, 6% earned over $250k, and some (undefined) portion of that earned over $500k. 94% of that 6% is White or Asian. You may not be a billionaire, but you're still a long ways off from the average American's lived experience. Taxing 70% isn't so different from what we used to do in recent decades. In 1980 the highest marginal tax rate was 70% at $215,400 ($765,084 in 2022 dollars) for married couples filing jointly. Somehow the US survived, and was a lot less divided as a country. In 1944 it was even up to 94% for those making $200k or above (not adjusted for inflation). If you think that $500k isn't wealthy, you may be the one out of touch. There are many people working longer, harder than your typical HNer and making much, MUCH less -- in the US alone. 2020 Household income distribution: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/cps-hinc/hinc-06.2020.html https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-p... Tax history 1913-2013 (not adjusted for inflation): https://files.taxfoundation.org/legacy/docs/fed_individual_rate_history_nominal.pdf https://files.taxfoundation.org/legacy/docs/fed_individual_r...
  - david38 4y ago
    If you’re just talking about income, it’s a worthless question. Actual wealth has a lot more involved than just income. If you make $400k as a couple in Silicon Valley, live in a modest apartment in Burlingame, you can easily spend north if $5k/m in rent alone. Let’s now suppose you have two or three kids with some expenses. Braces are $6500 each. You tore a rotator cuff, there’s another $4k. This happens, that happens. I can go on and on, but at the end of the day, you don’t own a home, live in smaller housing than most people I know in the burbs, drive a 12 year old Subaru, are not putting away enough for college by a long shot, so you’ll have to take out lots of loans (even for in-state), etc. The end result is this feels a lot more like middle class. Income tax alone eats 50% and you get relatively little for it if you don’t believe in buying F22s. There is no big savings account, stock holdings, vacation home, tax shelter, etc. Just two people making decent money that are raising a couple of kids in the same way our parents did, except it costs a lot more here. Without local cost of living, this discussion is meaningless.

unstatusthequo 4y ago

In what world is $500k as a couple “wealthy?” You have to be joking. Taxing 70%? That’s a sure fire way to have your precious tax donkeys leave the country. Then who will pay for everyone who doesn’t want to work? It’s this mentality that makes me not want to visit HN anymore.

cmmeur01 4y ago
What world are you living in where 500k/year isn’t wealthy?
- unstatusthequo 4y ago
  For two people. A world called California (which we left for Florida) with 39% top fed tax rate, something like 14% state/city/block tax, high property tax, high sales tax, etc. Am I the only one here who thinks sending off a huge portion of what I make is not really worth it? California was nice. But it’s not worth working another 5-10 years for the privilege. Don’t worry I’ll come back to California in 15 years when I have zero income and only property. If there’s water left.
  - metadat 4y ago
    You sound privileged, greedy, ungrateful, and out of touch with reality. Without society and government, you can expect fewer opportunities to prosper and live a nice, comfy, insulated little life.
  - solardev 4y ago
    I'm so sorry you had to buy one fewer yacht this year.
  - medvezhenok 4y ago
    For a couple making 500K and maxing out their 401Ks, the effective tax rate (state+federal) is 24% in Florida and 31.2% in San Francisco, CA. Which results in post tax (and post 401K) incomes of 340K (FL) and 305K (SF), or around a 10% difference in post-tax salary. You can verify this yourself on SmartAsset: https://smartasset.com/taxes/income-taxes https://smartasset.com/taxes/income-taxes
jdavis703 4y ago
I don’t consider myself wealthy, and I make less than half that… But I’m also not poor. I have no problem chipping in or 1 or 2 percent more if it means keeping the masses from revolution… As happened to my step mom’s parents in the Chinese cultural revolution.
ldjkfkdsjnv 4y ago
Yup same thoughts here... add in a mortgage, school loans, children, expensive cost of living, a few vacations, the rest in a college fund, and some left for savings/investing. Dwindles very fast.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
boomboomsubban 4y ago
>In what world is $500k as a couple “wealthy?” You have to be joking. It's 7x the median household income.
- medvezhenok 4y ago
  Slight correction - it makes more sense to compare post-tax incomes, so it's closer to 5.25x the median. Still basically on the cutoff of top 1% (I believe the cutoff is 600K nominal).
upsidesinclude 4y ago
You're clearly so far out of touch with reality that your contributions aren't beneficial anyway. I don't mean to be rude about it, but it's kind of bizarre. That is certainly well beyond the household average in the US, which is still below 100k. So, yes, most people consider >5x average annual household income to be lumped with "wealthy". Haha, that's two People, each making 20k per month. Being so totally immersed in your own chase with the Joneses to miss that verges on comedic were it not so insulting.
solardev 4y ago
How is that NOT wealthy? US household median income is around $70k. In 2022, 6% earned over $250k, and some (undefined) portion of that earned over $500k. 94% of that 6% is White or Asian. You may not be a billionaire, but you're still a long ways off from the average American's lived experience. Taxing 70% isn't so different from what we used to do in recent decades. In 1980 the highest marginal tax rate was 70% at $215,400 ($765,084 in 2022 dollars) for married couples filing jointly. Somehow the US survived, and was a lot less divided as a country. In 1944 it was even up to 94% for those making $200k or above (not adjusted for inflation). If you think that $500k isn't wealthy, you may be the one out of touch. There are many people working longer, harder than your typical HNer and making much, MUCH less -- in the US alone. 2020 Household income distribution: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/cps-hinc/hinc-06.2020.html https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-p... Tax history 1913-2013 (not adjusted for inflation): https://files.taxfoundation.org/legacy/docs/fed_individual_rate_history_nominal.pdf https://files.taxfoundation.org/legacy/docs/fed_individual_r...
- david38 4y ago
  If you’re just talking about income, it’s a worthless question. Actual wealth has a lot more involved than just income. If you make $400k as a couple in Silicon Valley, live in a modest apartment in Burlingame, you can easily spend north if $5k/m in rent alone. Let’s now suppose you have two or three kids with some expenses. Braces are $6500 each. You tore a rotator cuff, there’s another $4k. This happens, that happens. I can go on and on, but at the end of the day, you don’t own a home, live in smaller housing than most people I know in the burbs, drive a 12 year old Subaru, are not putting away enough for college by a long shot, so you’ll have to take out lots of loans (even for in-state), etc. The end result is this feels a lot more like middle class. Income tax alone eats 50% and you get relatively little for it if you don’t believe in buying F22s. There is no big savings account, stock holdings, vacation home, tax shelter, etc. Just two people making decent money that are raising a couple of kids in the same way our parents did, except it costs a lot more here. Without local cost of living, this discussion is meaningless.