I agree with you and your proposal with the exception of 5 figure income having no income tax. At a billion level it might not be so important the difference between one or two billion. But on the 5 digits salaries, the difference of someone making 30k or someone making 80k is definitely meaningful. And as someone being in a comfy point in between there I do think everyone in my bracket should be paying taxes. Not high, but definitely something. Then lower incomes then yes, definitely 0% tax. But the amount of people on 5 digits salaries that are on the higher end is definitely worth having some tax, even when a small amount it already helps support the system with so many.
HubertManne@piefed.social 1 day ago
Meh. I actually don't think its a good idea. You just draw power away from the best of a segment empowering the biggest assholes. Taxes should be progressive and include all sources of income not just wages and the tax brackets should go all the way up to the highest income level. So there should be a level for over 100 billion and another for over 10 billion and over 1 billion and so on. Five figure income should be zero.
yyprum@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
HubertManne@piefed.social 1 day ago
At the upper end you might be able to swing the more modest of housing and put away for retirement and that is great but it is not like changes circumstances that much. I would argue that opposite that the 2billion is one billion of funny money over what the one bilion guy has and should be taxed along the lines of lottery winnings.
jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
Five figure income should be zero? $10,000/year is not a livable income.
HubertManne@piefed.social 1 day ago
as papastevesy said im advocating for zero tax on five figures which would go up to 99,999.99
PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 1 day ago
They’re saying the tax rate should be 0 for 5-figure incomes.
Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It’s not a serious income. Why penalise the ppl at the bottom?
jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
oh I misunderstood. I thought “five figure income should be 0” meant “people shouldn’t be able to make even five figures.”
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 day ago
and the tax brackets should go all the way up to the highest income level
What does that even mean? They’re lower limits. Everything that exceeds the lower limit for the top bracket is taxed the top rate, which has no upper limit.
HubertManne@piefed.social 1 day ago
It means the highest tax bracket should not be in thousands when the top makes hundreds of billions.
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 day ago
The highest rate is on annual taxable income in the hundreds of thousands and up. The hundreds of billions are also getting taxed that top rate.
Your statement is muddled. Maybe the word same is missing like
Everyone in the top bracket shouldn’t be paying the same rate. Beyond the start of the current top bracket, they need continue adding increasing tax brackets for the millionaires & billionaires.
Some of your ideas equivocate themselves. Income taxes are already progressive. Taxable income already includes income other than wages.
The way you suggest realizing things that are already true draws into question whether you’ve ever filed taxes. Likewise for the people agreeing with you: have they ever filed taxes?
HubertManne@piefed.social 20 hours ago
Yes what I meant is the rate should not stop increasing at such a low amount. In fact the hundreds of billions do not pay the rate because of the way we tax work higher than returns and because social security and medicare have a max point. Basically the folks paying the highest rate are the folks that make it to that highest rate for what is still a common profession like doctors and lawyers. After that its escape velocity for taxes.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Yeah ofc. Why do you think the billionaires came up with this BS plan instead?