Economists Say We Should Tax The Rich At 90 Percent
 

America has been doing income taxes wrong for more than 50 years.

All Americans, including the rich, would be better off if top tax rates went back to Eisenhower-era levels when the top federal income tax rate was 91 percent, according to a new working paper by Fabian Kindermann from the University of Bonn and Dirk Krueger from the University of Pennsylvania.

The top tax rate that makes all citizens, including the highest 1 percent of earners, the best off is ?somewhere between 85 and 90 percent,? Krueger told The Huffington Post. Currently, the top rate of 39.6 percent is paid on income above $406,750 for individuals and $457,600 for couples.

Fewer than 1 percent of Americans, or about 1.3 million people, reach that top bracket.


Continued Economists Say We Should Tax The Rich At 90 Percent

yeah...a country with a statue of fuckin liberty should tax its most productive citizens to the point of communism. What a brilliant idea.

hey. if henry ford just paid 90% taxes, we could all be driving horses right now.

:error

Why not tax them at 99% instead? Probably would be better if the tax laws were straight forward without so many loopholes.

huff post and leftards strikes new level of stupidity.

I'm not sure who I would rather see burn to death in a fiery crash, you or DVtimes. It's a tough call.

No we shouldn't. We should just make sure they don't pay only 10% through loopholes.

Also, anyone making under 20k should be taxed 0%. Giving up a percentage of your money hurts more if you live below the poverty line.

You are kind of horribly misinformed. For a start America HAD your "communism" level taxes and the "fuckin' statue of liberty" survived just fine.

People like Howard Hughes and many other innovators all made squillions with high tax rates and it didn't stifle innovation. The tax rates were that high during the period of unquestioned American glory. Every old white republican arguing for lower taxes and looking back at the good old days of their childhood when America was strong is lionising the period of 90% tax rates.

There are actually valid reasons why a 90% tax rate doesn't stifle things that much. Firstly most idiots don't understand the government isn't taking 90% of your money, it really only affects people earning over $400k/yr so it doesn't stop the innovators dreaming about being millionaires and the guys that do earn a mill a year tend to only be able to do it for a short time, or they're so large they have 1 billion instead of 10 billion.
Secondly it encourages business owners to keep their money in/reinvest in the business which promotes growth, jobs and innovation as they try and find better uses for the money than taking it out as a wage to bump them from $450k/yr to $500k/yr.
Thirdly it promotes the demand side of the economy which is far more important than anything else. I've only ever increased my business due to customer demand. There is an acceptable level of higher tax I would pay to have more consumers willing to spend more money on my products although I wouldn't have a clue what it would be.

That said, no fucking way would I want to pay 90% tax and I don't think that level is reasonable. 50% tax and we might be having a conversation although I'd still try and minimise the shit out of it.

Person earned 300k. Post an example of how he would pay only 10%.
Note: deductable income is not loophole.

Good idea. I think its like this in the UK - anyone making under approx $16k/pa doesn't pay tax.

Id love to see if Warren Buffet still thinks he should pay more tax if he's offered the 90% level....

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.n...e25a3ac51b00ca


https://scontent-a-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/...84&oe=551D3613


https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.n...82b051ea209212


https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.n...affe8d47c93af4


https://scontent-a-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/...4c&oe=55080263

the real reason is egoistic: "if they pay more, I'll pay less"
the rest is just trying to put a spin on it to justify it...
just think for a sec, what if the cut off for 90% was chosen below your income? (so some of your income would get taxed at 90%) would it still sound like such a great idea?

Actually, as you had that 90 % tax during the golden 40-60's, Henry Ford paid those taxes, or at least could have. Those golden communist times. :)

Yeah, because they wouldn't move to another country if that was the case. :P

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh ...

US citizens still get taxed abroad :2 cents:

Although they can give up their citizenship.

This has worked well for France :upsidedow

he meant steal 90% from productive men's pocket and give it to the mostly parasites that produce nothing, suppose to be a good idea.

All taxing 90% would do *today* is force more people to do grey-area offshore stuff.

Just a heads up but he was paying taxes when the USA had a 90% bracket so the answer is they did and we don't.

taxes.derp

90% taxes? WHAT A GREAT IDEA...!!







(...for all the countries that American wealth would move to) :1orglaugh

Under communism there are no taxes. You keep all your wages. That is because property is communal.

The poor do pay tax in the UK, It is called VAT and it is 20%.

In fact the poor pay far more tax than the rich, they pay so much that their children go to school hungry and they can't afford to heat their houses.

Who earns how much is game, wealth production is complex with thousands of people needed to produce good, electrical generation, education, roads, postal services, fuel ...a person who says a person has made a million dollars has not thought it through. Could he have made a million without anyone else? On a desert island? You have to have a society there to exploit...

Like in this business you need all the elements models, photographers, websites, internet etc...Capitalist state power organises society so that a few people get 80% of the wealth.

A little thought would reveal the stupidity of a speculator making more than a teacher, doctor just because he can play the system

If the rich are asked to pay more taxes, then the government will find new ways to waste it. We have enough revenue, it's just that the spending of it is so inefficient.

give back socialisam yeah

so you spend 20 minutes writing all that, & in the end, you agree that 90% is unreasonable.

OK. :winkwink:

True, Fat envelopes for polititions, irresponsible spending of gov and burocrats, unreasonable military spendings and so on.

we no need that mutch tax if we want productive individuals/society.

i've lolled to this :1orglaugh

Well, more than one seat in a car :2 cents:

Wehateporn: you should receive a french honorary citizenship

90% taxes would just make me work less as i reach the higher brackets. I'd rather have more free time than give more of my money away.

When that would be relevant, the time you work is not so relevant. You know, you just skip the four hour lunch+golfing session, and go earlier to home. :)

It's so cute that people think that making money is just about working hard, especially when already being at the top notch. :)

A better way to approach this would be to close off the more ridiculous tax loopholes that are typically used by the very wealthy.

The simplified tax code

0-20,000 0%
20,001 - infinity 15%

Actual Net Income, IRS spends 100% of it's time finding people deducting their private planes, and Vacations to Fiji as business expenses.

Money moved offshore to be hidden is taxed at 100%

Now cut spending to responsible levels, deficit eliminated, national debt on the decline, and the dollar exchange goes to record highs.

If only I could be elected benevolent dictator :)

Making a lot of money, does not make someone "more" productive than someone that makes less. Most extremely wealthy are not Donald Trumps or Elon Musks, they are almost always trust fund babies whom inherited their money from their family.

With these kinds of people, they are not producing anything, their money just grows because they pay investment bankers to babysit their money. They are not producing anything, but their accountants and investor are by using the money.

So a postal worker making $50k a year is far more productive than some trust fund baby that probably has never done a days work in their life,

Even still, I don't agree with taxing someone at a higher percent than anyone else. Everyone should pay a flat tax rate and there shouldn't be special treatment up or down the chain.

Yep we do. We do get a break on the income meaning that the first 95k is not taxable but that means very little.

And still be responsible for the following 25 years.

Citizenship and the IRS are not that closely related.

I think making sure they paid some tax is a better idea.
The fact that some companies who make their money by using natural resources which should really be paying the citizens of the country they are in are not even paying taxes is unreal. Also some companies are making billions in profits each year yet pay almost nothing.
Small mom and pop shops struggle and still pay taxes.

is that info graphic actually accurate or manufactured like all his other shit?

if it is accurate, where they taxing at 90% because the country was prospering in the industrial revolution or did the high taxation kill it?

How? And how will US enforce that?