Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: MosesKnows
Who, in 1913, would object to a 1% tax on income over $20,000 when the average income was less than $1,000 a year?

Few would. But voters in the Northeast weren't that crazy for it because they were the people who had the most money. They saw it as a plot to take away their money.

28 posted on 09/02/2017 1:35:37 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: x
They saw it as a plot to take away their money

It was exactly that, the first "soak the rich" agenda. Who is rich and who decides who is rich was the question then and is a question now.

Earners considered rich in 1913 earned around $3,000 annually.
Earners considered rich in 2013 earned around $300,000 annually.

None of the $3,000 of the 1913 earner’s income was subject to tax.
Virtually all $300,000 of the 2013 earner’s income is subject to tax.

Keep in mind, only the amount over $20,000 was subject to the 1% tax. The next bracket after the 1% tax bracket on incomes over $20,000 was $500,000. Income over $500,000 was subject to a 5% tax.

The IRS administrating America's tax code currently collect 97% of taxes from the top 50% wage earners.

Not only do the wealthy pay their fair share, they pay everybody’s fair share.

29 posted on 09/02/2017 2:10:18 PM PDT by MosesKnows (Love Many, Trust Few, and Always Paddle Your Own Canoe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson