im actually fine with paying more taxes as you earn more (even though this has been a very counter productive position for me in the last 5+ years). i think its a foolish tax system but if thats the rules then so be it.

but im firmly for capping all personal tax liability at a combined rate at <50%. you should never have to by law give more back than you earn

and there were even more ways around taxes back then lol almost everything was considered a business expense including the boozy lunches for “business development”

This post was edited by excellence on Sep 11 2020 11:01pm

In australia i paid $3,530 in tax this year after getting my taxable income down to $29,000 by claiming the cost of my managing my tax affairs as a tax deducted expense.

And there's never been a law stating that in the US either. Progressive taxes aren't "91% tax rate means 91% of all my money!" and if you think so lol. Otherwise, Strawman.

There is a point where it would become that, however its over 100 million per year

No.

Go Google references all you want but this isn't possible.

The average person's tax rate is somewhere around 30%. I was born in 1956, and it's been that way all the time I've been on this planet.

If the tax rate started at 2m at 91% you would only need to earn enough per year to make the first 2 million irrelevant.

Ok so.

DuckDuckGo "how does progressive taxation work"

And then get back to us.

This post was edited by inkanddagger on Sep 12 2020 12:22am

I know exactly how progressive taxation works..
What part do you struggle with?

No matter how much someone makes, taxes don’t make them make less than positive, regardless of tax bracket. There are no brackets exceeding 100%. Your post implies that people can lose money by making more, which is patently false.