Your ideal tax rate structure?

[KeepingItReal]

Because what you are proposing isn't feasible.
Say your community needs a new hospital, but every young person in town says "fuck it, I'm healthy, I'm not putting any money towards that".

If the community needs a hospital and its profitable for it to be located in said community why would a hospital not be built? Last I checked a large percentage of hospitals are privately owned.

Or you want the street in front of your house graded in the winter, but half your neighbours say, "I have a pick up, I'm not spending my money on that."

Your example of your house being graded doesn't fall in the "quality of life in my community" category you mentioned considering the fact that it's only you who wants the grading to happen and not your neighbors. Why should your pickup driving neighbors fall in line with your vision of the world? In this case your vision being that you want the street in front of your house being graded.

Successful society will always need a level of government and taxation other wise every individuals own self interest will prevent anything from being done. But when we become so jaded by bloated, wasteful, corrupt governments we end up throwing out the baby with the bath water.

So much has been done in the world, whose interests do you think it is being done in if not the individuals themselves?

 

[HeffDoesWant]

It's about incentives for me, if the tax rate is higher for higher income individuals you are either giving them the incentives to find a way around that tax rate or incentives to earn less. There will always be some individuals who will produce no matter what but those are rare. It also seems to me that higher income individuals have more options as where they can go in the world. A higher paid individual is more able to move to another country with a lower tax rate than a lower paid individual.

Incentives to earn less?

I think you are confusing something.

 

[Snackbar]

Your example of your house being graded doesn't fall in the "quality of life in my community" category you mentioned considering the fact that it's only you who wants the grading to happen and not your neighbors. Why should your pickup driving neighbors fall in line with your vision of the world?

This validates the point I'm making though. Why should anyone conform to what anyone views as ideal for the community then? There are countless things in our lives that we take for granted, which are not profitable, yet take large amounts of capital to create, and add to our quality of life. Parks, non toll roads, a huge array of infrastructure, etc. If you adopt a tax free, opt into what you like society, it would be a fragmented, inefficient mess.

 

[KeepingItReal]

Incentives to earn less?

I think you are confusing something.

Call me crazy but I've got a whole lot of incentives to invest in dividend paying stocks considering the fact that the tax rate on dividends income of around $38,000 is 0%. Incentives matter, if you give people incentives to earn untaxed income, or put their money in a tax shelter, they will do it.

 

[Senzo Tanaka]

It's about incentives for me, if the tax rate is higher for higher income individuals you are either giving them the incentives to find a way around that tax rate or incentives to earn less. There will always be some individuals who will produce no matter what but those are rare. It also seems to me that higher income individuals have more options as where they can go in the world. A higher paid individual is more able to move to another country with a lower tax rate than a lower paid individual.

Greed has gotten to the point where being a millionaire is not good enough. Then it was a billionaire. Now it's a billion a quarter. It's unstainable and companies are doing everything they can to squeeze out more profit.

What needs to happen is a numbers crunch and a redefinition of wealth. I equate it to something like World of Warcraft where everyone gets so powerful that every now and then, there's a numbers crunch where before, you were dealing thousands of damage and now, it's hundreds. You are still powerful but not obscenely powerful where the game is trivial.

That's what needs to happen with wealth. If you are making millions, you are wealthy. Billions is obscene. Especially when it's made by outsourcing, tax dodging and destroying the working and middle class.

People wouldn't have less incentive to work. They'd simply have to go back to 1 yacht instead of 3.

 

[KeepingItReal]

This validates the point I'm making though. Why should anyone conform to what anyone views as ideal for the community then? There are countless things in our lives that we take for granted, which are not profitable, yet take large amounts of capital to create, and add to our quality of life. Parks, non toll roads, a huge array of infrastructure, etc. If you adopt a tax free, opt into what you like society, it would be a fragmented, inefficient mess.

But the things you are listing off are things that are benefiting the larger community not just your view that the street in front of your house needs to graded, which wouldn't have benefited your pickup driving neighbors. Also, last I checked those things don't require a 50% tax rate. I don't advocate being tax free but 50% tax rate is way too much.

As for people taking things for granted, call me crazy but when you know you paid for something, you don't take it for granted. It's only when you pay and the fact that you paid is obfuscated by this thing called taxes that you can take it for granted.

 

[KeepingItReal]

Greed has gotten to the point where being a millionaire is not good enough. Then it was a billionaire. Now it's a billion a quarter. It's unstainable and companies are doing everything they can to squeeze out more profit.

What needs to happen is a numbers crunch and a redefinition of wealth. I equate it to something like World of Warcraft where everyone gets so powerful that every now and then, there's a numbers crunch where before, you were dealing thousands of damage and now, it's hundreds. You are still powerful but not obscenely powerful where the game is trivial.

That's what needs to happen with wealth. If you are making millions, you are wealthy. Billions is obscene. Especially when it's made by outsourcing, tax dodging and destroying the working and middle class.

People wouldn't have less incentive to work. They'd simply have to go back to 1 yacht instead of 3.

All those billionaires are not billionaires because of income though, they are billionaires because of stock. Stock doesn't function the same way cash does at all, so it's silly to pretend that it does.

Well gosh, if there weren't any incentives to outsource would anyone do it? If there weren't any incentives to put money in tax shelters would anyone do it?

Oh no they wouldn't move from 3 yachts to 1 yacht, they would take their business outside of the country, into another country where tax incentives are in favor of doing business.

 

[Grant Me Revenge]

90% of all income for persons that make over 10 mil. No taxes for anyone making less than 250 grand. Corporate tax 70%.

 

[Scheme]

90% of all income for persons that make over 10 mil. No taxes for anyone making less than 250 grand. Corporate tax 70%.

Corporate tax 70%? Enjoy not having any businesses in your country.

 

[Grant Me Revenge]

@Scheme I mean for the world, Holmes.

 

[Cid]

In before "But nobody in the highest bracket ever actually paid that much!!"

Only the ignorant think progressive taxation is somehow "unfair". They simply don't understand how it functions.

The reality is that both Middle Class Jim and Jeff Bezos pay the exact same rate on the first 50K they make in a year. It's just that that 50K is all Middle Class Jim makes for the entire year. While Jeff reaches that figure in the first few hours of the year.

The point is that NO American is required by a progressive tax system to pay even one penny more than any OTHER American on the same amounts of annual income. Nothing could be more equitable.

Bezos salary is only $81,840 dollars per year.

Income taxes are for poor people who make their money through work.

 

[HeffDoesWant]

So far nobody has broken it down.


Like say

0 to 20k = 10%
20k to 60k= 15%
60k to 100k= 17%
100k to 200k =20
200k to 350k= 25%
350k to 800k =30%
800k to 2 mill= 35%
2 mill + =50%

0% would be best but the rates must vary according to how much needs to be raised.

But ill have a stab

0-25k 0%
25 to 50 15%
50 to 100 30 %
200 to 400 40%
400+ 50%.

Although measures to ensure no one faces a rate higher than 50% are essential.

 

[gatchaman]

Vote Tax:
Each vote costs $1.
You may cast as many votes as you pay for.
This vote tax is the only tax.
The government may not print or borrow additional money.
Fines are okay, but the government is limited in that it must be able to prove that the average person is not ignorant of the law.

 

[Cuzcatlan]

Flat Tax
0% below 100k per person regardless of Marriage situation
5% every 100k over 100k till a max of 25%

 

[HeffDoesWant]

Call me crazy but I've got a whole lot of incentives to invest in dividend paying stocks considering the fact that the tax rate on dividends income of around $38,000 is 0%. Incentives matter, if you give people incentives to earn untaxed income, or put their money in a tax shelter, they will do it.

You still have not explained an incentive to earn less?

 

[High Altitude]

First thing that needs to happen is everybody should have skin in the game.

Completely ludicrous that half don't even pay any federal income tax.

 

[Cid]

Talking about structure so fuck the numbers (same structure can be used to raise different amounts, obviously). No payroll or corporate taxes, income tax kicks in after income in the top 1% of the population (kind of arbitrary number but the point is to incentivize companies to spend a higher percentage of payroll on lower incomes). Capital gains is treated as income. Land-value tax accounts for most revenue. Additional carbon taxes, sugar taxes, etc.--stuff that harms the community is taxed. Inheritance values up to 10x median income (again somewhat arbitrary number but this is more about the principles) are untaxed; 80% beyond that (again somewhat arbitrary and negotiable). Portion of the inheritance tax goes to building up a diversified SWF (public and private equity, land, etc.).

Good start.

I think the free and democratic world should band together to apply a social credit like system on trade and outsourcing to foreign countries and a taxation system that takes into account our values of things like a free press, political and religious freedoms, open and transparent democracies, human rights records etc.

I don't care about this don't impose values crap. If you're a poor country with low wage costs that espouses our views of basic human rights we should have an incredibly low tax system that helps build up trade with your country.

If you're a poor or even a rich country with a horrible record of these same values we should be taxing trade with said country at a substantially higher rate.


We can call it the hindsight policy.

 

[aunshi189]

I think the hard part is determining the role and size of government, not the tax rate.

I think this is why this thread is putting the cart before the horse. You can't determine an ideal tax rate until you've determined what you want your government to be spending and on what.

 

[Oeshon]

First thing that needs to happen is everybody should have skin in the game.

Completely ludicrous that half don't even pay any federal income tax.

Taxation is theft

 

[HeffDoesWant]

I think this is why this thread is putting the cart before the horse. You can't determine an ideal tax rate until you've determined what you want your government to be spending and on what.

You can't determine the exact numbers but you can devise the structure.