Saturday, May 28, 2011
Butt Crack Bracket Creep
Just for the record (again), I'm totally in favor of the top tax rates going back to 39.6% (hell, let's just round it up to 40). The deficits, folks - they're just too big (and, yes, the rising disparity in wealth is also an issue). Granted, my preference, would be to increase the threshold from the Democrats' $250,000 a year to somewhere between $300-500,000 (on this point I'm in total agreement with the new Democratic Congresswoman from New York's 26th district). But even on that, I'm saying, I'd be willing to negotiate......................................................................................................Where I'm much less like to negotiate is on the rates going significantly higher than 40. I mean, seriously, folks. Have you seen some of the rates that the progressives have been throwing around lately; 60, 70, 80, 90%? My God, they're chilling! And, yes, folks, at some point it has to become a punitive (not to mention, a strong disincentive) act............................................................................................................Here, let's just take a look at one of the more modest proposals - 60%. Start there. Add to that the fact that a lot of these same progressives also want to raise the limit on FICA. That gets it up to 67.65%. Add to that the fact that top rate in New York for income tax is 8.97%. That gets it up to 76.62%. Add to that the fact that the mill rate in Allegany County is 30.67. So, if a person making $600,000 a year in that county has a million dollar home, that's another 5%. That gets it up to 81.62%. Add to that all of the gas taxes, sin taxes, luxury taxes, etc. and, man, you really in fact WOULD BE stickin' it to these folks.............................................................................................................Look, folks, I know that this isn't a perfect analysis. Certain taxes, for instance, can also be deducted. But it's at least somewhat illustrative, no?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I cant resist this....Did Anthony Weiner send pictures of his weiner on Twitter?
Sorry for the subject change,but you have to admitt,if its true the word play in the media gonna be good.
Will, I believe you're the one doing the misrepresenting here. So much so I find it chilling. None of the taxes you're talking about are applied to total gross income. They are only applied to "earnings" OVER a certain amount. "Earnings" under that amount are taxed at a LOWER rate.
What you also totally ignore is the progressive's proposal that additional tax brackets be created on the higher end. Yet you wildly misrepresent the progressive position by asserting that we're talking about taxing someone making 250k at 60 (or even 90) percent? WTF Will? This is, IMO, a very dishonest post.... and not least bit illustrative.
Robert Reich's proposal is "to raise the marginal tax to 70 percent on incomes over $15 million, to 60 percent on incomes between $5 million and $15 million, and to 50 percent on incomes between $500,000 and $5 million".
So you're going to have to pay an additional 10.4 percent on the 100k you're making over 500k. Would you flee the country and renounce your American citizenship if that were to happen?
A couple of other points: [1] Your profile says you're located in CT, not NY.
[2] I don't get the title of your post. Are you saying that progressives who suggest your taxes be raised are a$$holes?
[3] I only recall ONE post where you expressed concern for the plight of the less fortunate (the one where you suggested we bring back eugenics)... yet multiple posts were you cry that the wealthy MIGHT have to pay a little more in taxes... what's up with that?
w-d,
You make an important point that needs to be repeated.
The top tax rates "are only applied to "earnings" OVER a certain amount."
Everyone pays the same tax rate for the same taxable income. The person earning a million dollars pays the same tax on the first $50,000 as the person with a total of $50,000 income. It is only incremental income that gets taxed at the higher rate.
So, when you say the top marginal rate should be 50%, and let's say the top rate applies to incomes over $1 million, only the money you earn over 1 million is taxes at that rate. The first 100,000 is taxed at a lower rate, the same as everyone else, and so on.
"Have you seen some of the rates that the progressives have been throwing around lately; 60, 70, 80, 90%"
90%, why not 100%? It's the Left's advocacy of the compete supremacy of the ruling class over the ruled.
I understand how the taxes work, wd. Over a certain amount ($250,000,according o the Dems), that's when the higher tax-rate kicks in. And, yes, I still find it chilling that the government would end up getting 80% (more, if we went over a 60% top rate) of THAT money.............I believe, dmaks, that wd once advocated a 99.5% top rate. Hopefully, it was with tongue in cheek.
I find it chilling that the top 400 earners only paid an average of about 17% taxes.
Jerry, is that because a lot of them make their money from capital gains distributions? If so, I have absolutely no problem raising the capital gains rate to the same rate as regular income (indexed for inflation, possibly). That would not even be a small issue for me.
Post a Comment