2 ms·
Sorry have quite a bit of overlap between the two points. Rates themselves are very abstract quantities since loopholes and deductions have a huge effect and c
by curt 14y ago
Sorry have quite a bit of overlap between the two points.
Rates themselves are very abstract quantities since loopholes and deductions have a huge effect and change greatly with time. A good way to look at it is the percent of total tax payments.
To answer your question if you take a look at the link in the post you replied to, the income tax + capital gain tax burden for the rich would be even higher. Likely with the top 1% around 45%-50% and top 10% around 80%+ of all income and capital gains taxes. As you can see the rich already pay a huge amount.
Even if you were to raise the rates on the rich their numbers are so small that it would only cover a week or so of spending at the current levels.
- tankenmate 14y agoI think you misunderstand what has been said, the IRS reported that the maximum marginal tax rate in the 50s was ~90%, but the effective rate was ~50%. Now the maximum marginal tax rate is 35% and the effective rate is ~16%. Rich people as a percentage of their wealth, and probably their income, spend less than poor people. Ipso facto one effective way to boost spending in the economy is to take money from the rich and give it to the poor, i.e. more taxes please.
- Teckla 14y agoWith all due respect, your insistence on constantly using the phrase "tax burden" instead of "tax rate" makes me doubt your honesty. It's a shameful rhetorical trick that degrades the HN experience.