Ocasio-Cortez floats 70% tax on top earners

[Mountainmanbob]

You know as well as I do that we were talking about income tax rates in the past.

I think she wants to tax everyone except for herself.

Her other bright idea was to do away with all student loan monies owed. After some research it appears she owes plenty.

Surprise surprise from The Other Side of the Moon.

M-Bob

 

[Hank77]

I think she wants to tax everyone except for herself.

Her other bright idea was to do away with all student loan monies owed. After some research it appears she owes plenty.

Surprise surprise from The Other Side of the Moon.

M-Bob

Thankfully far left progressives aren't the whole party.

 

[Percivale]

Are you saying that our new little congresswoman wants to tax me 70%?
M-Bob

Only if you are a millionaire or close to it. We’re talking about the highest rates, not the rates for everyone. Of course she’d never get something like that passed, most of congress is more reasonable and wouldn’t want to drive rich people out of the country.

 

[John Bowen]

2 % own 90 % of all the wealth in America . People with 10's of billions one person having 150 billion ? .The problem is once they buy all the mansions , jets, yachts , they have nothing more they could possibly buy .They park their $$$ in a swiss bank account so there is less $$$ in the American economy for everyone else . Thats why the real income of the middle class has gone down from 20 yrs ago. Of course people don't notice as much cause they have brought all the cheap Chinese stuff in paying slave wages .So the consequences are keep doing the same thing and lower the incomes of the middle class even more or tax these multi billionaires with more $$$$ than they need or could ever spend so the $$$ gets back into the American economy .

 

[Yekcidmij]

It could as easily be fair that what people get to keep be proportional to their effort, which would be highly progressive.

Or it could be pretty regressive since "proportional to their effort" is pretty subjective. A physical laborer arguably puts in much more "effort" than an executive.

 

[Yekcidmij]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez floats 70 percent tax on top earners to fund Green New Deal

I find it interesting that so many people seem to know what's fair to do with other people's stuff.

 

[Yarddog]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez floats 70 percent tax on top earners to fund Green New Deal

I wouldn't mind seeing that high of a tax rate "if" many of the writes offs would be put back in. IOW, invest in American factories and American workers, plus climate friendly initiatives, etc and you will get a much lower tax bill.

 

[Sparagmos]

Although it unfortunately wouldn't affect me, I have to wonder why a rich person should give the government more of their income than they keep for themselves? Seems to me it would kill the incentive to try to grow a business if you know that once you hit a certain revenue number you'll be working more for the government than you will be for yourself.

That’s not how it would work. Only the money you make that puts you in the higher bracket gets taxed at the higher bracket rate.

 

[Jon Osterman]

Top rate tax should be set to the maximum of the Laffer Curve in order to maximise tax income. It is debatable where that is, but most estimates place at at around the 70% point.

 

[Radagast]

2 % own 90 % of all the wealth in America .

Well, there is a difference between wealth and income.

Income taxes obviously tax income.

They park their $$$ in a swiss bank account so there is less $$$ in the American economy for everyone else

Generally, no. Generally their money is invested in the national economy. Bill Gates, for example, is worth $82 billion:

• $14 billion invested in Microsoft
• $64 billion invested in other things, including Four Seasons Hotels, Canadian National Railway, and John Deere
• $4 billion in cash and a huge house

 

[Radagast]

Top rate tax should be set to the maximum of the Laffer Curve in order to maximise tax income. It is debatable where that is, but most estimates place at at around the 70% point.

Really? Australia is a fairly socialist country, and our top tax rate is 45%. Higher rates than that have been bad for the economy.

Although it unfortunately wouldn't affect me, I have to wonder why a rich person should give the government more of their income than they keep for themselves? Seems to me it would kill the incentive to try to grow a business if you know that once you hit a certain revenue number you'll be working more for the government than you will be for yourself.

That's exactly right. The British discovered this when they ran 90% marginal tax rates. It removes the incentives for people to start up new businesses, and that's bad for jobs.

It also reduces the incentive to get into high-income jobs (like medical specialists) where people need the high income to pay off a very lengthy student period. That means fewer specialists (who will also charge more). That's bad for health care.

 

[John Bowen]

Well, there is a difference between wealth and income.

Income taxes obviously tax income.



Generally, no. Generally their money is invested in the national economy. Bill Gates, for example, is worth $82 billion:

• $14 billion invested in Microsoft
• $64 billion invested in other things, including Four Seasons Hotels, Canadian National Railway, and John Deere
• $4 billion in cash and a huge house

 

[John Bowen]

There is only so much $$$ in the system at one time or it would have no value simple math. Allowing Bill Gates , Bezos to have more $$$ than most countries in the world means less $$$ for everyone else .Whats better for the overall economy to have one person have 100 million house or thousands have a 200 k house ? which creates more jobs better life for everyone ? Or same with these mega corporations Microsoft , Google or hundreds of software companies which one is better for national security since the world runs on computers ?

 

[Radagast]

There is only so much $$$ in the system at one time or it would have no value simple math

Actually, that's not how it works at all, and going down that road gives you the socialist hell that is Venezuela.

What we want is an economy that makes everybody better off. That means creating jobs, building houses, and encouraging people with new ideas.

To do that, you need to encourage people to take some financial risks, which means letting them keep a fair percentage of any profits there might be.

 

[tulc]

(snip) How does she compute what is fair? (snip)

Interesting question I found this:
GOP Strategist Calls Ocasio-Cortez 'The Little Girl.' She Lets Him Have It.

But what does Ocasio-Cortez know about tax policy? “A lot,” said the headline of an opinion piece Saturday in The New York Times by Nobel economics laureate Paul Krugman. A similar tax rate was imposed in the U.S. for 35 years after World War II, which included some of the “most successful periods of economic growth in history,” Krugman wrote.

Tax cuts for the ultra wealthy mean far less to them than cuts for people with modest incomes, Krugman noted. And extra money in millions of hands boosts spending.

“A policy that makes the rich a bit poorer will affect only a handful of people, and will barely affect their life satisfaction, since they will still be able to buy whatever they want,” Krugman wrote.

Nobel economics laureate Peter Diamond — “arguably the world’s leading expert in public finance,” according to Krugman — has calculated the optimum top tax rate at 73 percent. Several other experts back that up.

So Ocasio-Cortez, “far from showing her craziness, is fully in line with serious economic research,” Krugman added. Republican policy to keep taxes on the wealthy low, on the other hand, “rests on research by … well, nobody,” he added.

tulc(thought the above was interesting)

 

[Radagast]

Interesting question I found this:

 

[Sparagmos]

Interesting question I found this:
GOP Strategist Calls Ocasio-Cortez 'The Little Girl.' She Lets Him Have It.

tulc(thought the above was interesting)

I was just about to post that second article myself. And people need to stop acting like she just pulled her ideas out of her behind.

 

[Radagast]

And people need to stop acting like she just pulled her ideas out of her behind.

I don't think anyone's doing that; they are standard extreme-left ideas.

People are saying (correctly, imho) that they wouldn't work.

 

[Sparagmos]

I don't think anyone's doing that; they are standard extreme-left ideas.

People are saying (correctly, imho) that they wouldn't work.

Not everyone is doing it. But the ideas are being treated as they are “hers” by a lot of lay people on the right. As you seem to be aware, her policies are pretty common on the left right now.

 

[SkyWriting]

Trust me. The records on that are permanently sealed. Next time someone says somebody else should pay their "fair share" simply ask them what that is and see how fast they run away.

Well Warren Buffet has promoted a "fair Share plan" we could try.
He says he should pay the same tax rate as his secretary, at least.

The Buffett Rule is part of a tax plan proposed by President Barack Obama in 2011. The tax plan would apply a minimum tax rate of 30 percent on individuals making more than one million dollars a year.
Warren Buffett has a simple explanation for why rich Americans should...

This seems a good place to start the "tax the rich" experiment.

Why go to the Cortez plan of keeping other policy in place and jumping to 70% when a person with some investment experience says that a 30% minimum is a good plan? I'd take my advice from a guy from Nebraska who has always invested in America and wants it to profit.

Warren Buffett still lives in the Omaha, Nebraska, home he bought in 1958 for $31,000.