Economy "Radical" Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

spamking

The world is your Indian taco
Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
25,978
Reaction score
6,703
I'm all for improving various technology to cut down on carbon emissions, etc. But she seriously wants to do away with use of fossil fuels within 12 years?

Then a 60-70% tax rate on some portion of 10 million of income?



 
Post the dancing video...

Why? I wanted to see what folks thought about no more fossil fuels in 12 years . . . and how it might impact them.
 
First part dumb

60-70% is too high but it is also dumb that our tax brackets stop increasing at 500k
 
I'm all for improving various technology to cut down on carbon emissions, etc. But she seriously wants to do away with use of fossil fuels within 12 years?

It's certainly possible, and I don't think we need unnecessary moderation in dealing with ecological collapse. Just like we immediately did away with PCB's and lead production, we can do away with fossil fuels: the breadth of the transitional difficulties will obviously be bigger, but we can handle it.

Then a 60-70% tax rate on some portion of 10 million of income?

Still lower than the highest marginal rate (>91%) during the country's glory years.

eisenhower-tax-rates.jpg
 
It's certainly possible, and I don't think we need unnecessary moderation in dealing with ecological collapse.



Still lower than the highest marginal rate (>91%) during the country's glory years.

eisenhower-tax-rates.jpg

How many folks actually paid that 91% though?
 
I'm all for improving various technology to cut down on carbon emissions, etc. But she seriously wants to do away with use of fossil fuels within 12 years?

Then a 60-70% tax rate on some portion of 10 million of income?




Some western Euro countries are saying similar things, i.e. banning fossil fuel powered vehicles in a decade or 2.
 
She's young and naive. You start taxing at 70% and you're gonna see a lot of people move their money out of the country.
 
The problem is that tractors and trucks need fossil fuels.
 
It's certainly possible, and I don't think we need unnecessary moderation in dealing with ecological collapse. Just like we immediately did away with PCB's and lead production, we can do away with fossil fuels: the breadth of the transitional difficulties will obviously be bigger, but we can handle it.



Still lower than the highest marginal rate (>91%) during the country's glory years.

eisenhower-tax-rates.jpg
The rich avoided paying 70-90% tax rates through legal means. There were ways around that and they take advantage of it.
 
Good for her. Real change will only happen when people make it happen. I wish she was president. Making the richest 1% pay more in taxes would make a lot of things affordable. Universal health care/education, infrastructure improvements, etc.
 
It applied to income over $400,000 (or about $4 million today).

So, plenty of people.

Good thing I don't have to worry about that bracket . . .
 
Good for her. Real change will only happen when people make it happen. I wish she was president. Making the richest 1% pay more in taxes would make a lot of things affordable. Universal health care/education, infrastructure improvements, etc.

President? Uh, can she make it through her first week on the job before we go crowning her anything like that? Sheesh.
 
The rich avoided paying 70-90% tax rates through legal means. There were ways around that and they take advantage of it.

Duh. Obviously tax rates and effective tax rates differ, but those means of avoidance, which I would be interested to hear you explain, also shift income toward socially beneficial investment elsewhere. Anyways, the effective overall tax rate for those earners was about 38%, compared to about 25% now.
 
Good for her. Real change will only happen when people make it happen. I wish she was president. Making the richest 1% pay more in taxes would make a lot of things affordable. Universal health care/education, infrastructure improvements, etc.
<Dany07>
 
President? Uh, can she make it through her first week on the job before we go crowning her anything like that? Sheesh.

Why not have a president with such progressive views? Maybe not her specifically, but it would be a lot better than the usual crooks we elect.
 
Back
Top