Replies

The highest top marginal tax rate is 35%. The highest top marginal tax rate has evolved since 1913. Re: http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

Today's top marginal tax rate is certainly not the highest in our history - not even close. The wealthy and super-wealthy are aware of past tax rates and you can be assured that they love the status quo. To whom much is given (in this life) much is required. A progressive tax is fair. No man is an island. Carnegie's wealth and legacy would have been better spent on his poor workers who helped him become rich rather than on libraries and concert halls. Until we eliminate our debt and deficit, we would be wise to do the following:

1. Pass a balanced budget amendment
2. Create more tax brackets/rates that jump at, e.g., at $500K, $1M, $5M, etc. The income tax rate should range from 0% to 50% or higher depending on income.
3. Reduce the tax rate across the board only when the government has a surplus.

Most of the media pundits and other folks selling the idea that the rich and super-rich should not be taxed more are those who are rich themselves or those who depend on the rich for re-election. Many poor and middle class folks defending the rich are being sold a bill of goods. The current rate on the super rich is historically very low. We need to revise our progressive rates to vary on many more that the few brackets we have today.

Look at the highest marginal tax rates through the 50s. They averaged around 90% for Pete's sake. The nation did quite well through the 50s and there wasn't any cry of class warfare.

Gates and Buffett and other super-rich believe that they should be taxed more and they're right!

Yours has got to be the most economically ignorant post I’ve ever seen on FR. I expected a /sarcasm tag somewhere it was so ridiculous.

You want tax rates of 0% for some people and 50% for others ? Why should anybody freeload and get their government services for free ?

Do you even know any of the numbers involved ? Here are a few:

1) Total personal income is roughly $13T.
2) Total Federal income tax receipts including individual filers and corporate filers is $1.3T
3) The average Federal income tax rate is 9.9%
4) The other $900B is coming from SS/M taxes and miscellaneous fuel & sin taxes, and import duties.

So ... you want some people to pay taxes at 50% just so other people from paying a mere 10% ? Because that is all it would take to raise the same revenue — 10% on individuals and 0% of Corporations.

Here’s what we need to do:

1) Flat tax on individual income of 10% with no exemptions, deductions, or credits
2) Eliminate Corporate taxation
3) Zero-base budgeting with separate budgets for SS/M and DOT that have their own tax bases
4) Give all Federal lands back to the states to manage
5) Eliminate all welfare, food stamps, foreign aid, housing assistance, Medicaid, and Obamacare

Eliminating the overhead and drag of Corporate taxes and letting high earners keep 90% of the fruits of their labor would make America the most attractive place in the world to operate a business. The economy would grow at 7% per year until unemployment was non-existent. Eliminating unemployment alone would add $200B to revenues and cut spending by $150B in the first year. The economic growth would push income tax revenues to $2T within five years and SS/M + misc revenues to $1.3T. In addition, the low tax rates on doctors would reduce the cost of healthcare.

To whom much is given (in this life) much is required. A progressive tax is fair.

Exactly how is any of this parable from which you plucked your out-of-context proof-text applicable to government and taxation? Since when did the government become "Master" and "Son of Man"? I didn't get the memo.

41 Peter asked, “Lord, are you telling this parable to us, or to everyone?”
⁴² The Lord answered, “Who then is the faithful and wise manager, whom the master puts in charge of his servants to give them their food allowance at the proper time? ⁴³ It will be good for that servant whom the master finds doing so when he returns. ⁴⁴ Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions. ⁴⁵ But suppose the servant says to himself, ‘My master is taking a long time in coming,’ and he then begins to beat the other servants, both men and women, and to eat and drink and get drunk. ⁴⁶ The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of. He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the unbelievers.
⁴⁷ “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. ⁴⁸ But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.

You think that some people ought to pay more taxes simply because they can. Where is the "fairness" or moral logic in your assumption that citizens do not have first claim to their earnings? Do you imagine that the right to property is derived from the state? Where is the justice in your assumption that it is permissible for some to be treated differently under the rule of law based on nothing but unequal income, wealth, power or other some other attribute?

Cordially,