Either we learn to start working on our own society and less about individual greed, or we die as a country - and breakup. DD
I like UBI, but $12k/year isn't enough. Cut off your nose to spite your face? One, most people making in excess of $10 million a year are not working for a salary, so they can't really just stop and take it easy for the remainder of the year. The dividends just keep rolling in regardless. The people who are making >$10 million in salary also can't stop without imperiling the first 10. James Harden can't stop playing after the first half of the season. Jamie Dimon can't kick it in April and let the company coast. Second, you'd rather earn $0 than $0.30? I am not at all concerned that high earners will elect to not work. They'll optimize their books for taxes, but they will always work. But if they somehow do work less, I think that's fine. They might find more enjoyment in life, and others might find more opportunity while these guys aren't competing.
Some conservatives are inclined toward UBI as an opportunity to take down other parts of the safety net. You can say people don't need food stamps, energy assistance, whatever because they should have enough money with UBI. UBI would be a lot cheaper to administer than a platter of assistance services.
The OP appears to be yet another entitled millennial who thinks the world owes him something. Maybe this will make him feel better about his crappy life.
I'm a millennial. I'm nowhere close to earning $10 million a year. I don't believe in taxing income over $10 million at a 70% rate. I take umbrage with millennial bashing. Those who deserve to be bashed are the Boomers who drove this country into the f**king ground and then complain about millennials who have had no impact on the sh**ty current state of affairs. Millennials lives are crappy (lack of affordable tuition, lack of affordable housing, a 22 trillion dollar federal debt) because they were dealt this hand by the Boomers.
I know that you're trolling so I'm done in this thread. I refuse to believe anyone is this ignorant. If you're serious, please don't have children until you grow up
Athletes are the only exception. Get over it. They can fully depreciate their most valuable asset, their body, over the life of their sports career. Their body is what is used to earn that contract. At some point it just cant keep up.
So how much more are YOU willing to pay? It is incredibly naive to think that the 10mm plus tax, if ever passed, would actually start at 10mm. There would be increased levels going all the way up until you hit 70 to 90 percent at 10mm. Otherwise, not enough money. But again, for all of those who believe in increasing other people's taxes, how much more are you willing to pay?
Yeah. But that is not what is really being bandied about. 10mm sounds good because it doesn't impact a lot of voters. Has anyone ever represented that the rates below 10mm stay the same?
I gave you a good reason why. State why you disagree or end of discussion. You guys have given weak arguments which I refuted.
The current brackets for married filing jointly are: 10% Up to $19,050 12% $77,400 22% $165,000 24% $315,000 32% $400,000 35% $600,000 37% Greater than $600,000 AOC presents an 8th 70% Greater than $10 million Tax Foundation apparently thinks it is just an 8th bracket, and they go on to say it is a terrible idea because it would cause people to change their behaviors around work and taking capital gains, which would undermine the revenues. But, let's say there will be a bunch more brackets to climb to 70%. Maybe something like this: 37% $1 million 40% $4 million 50% $7 million 60% $10 million 70% Greater than $10 million I think I'd be fine with paying that. Other considerations aside, if I made a decent middle class salary of $100k, I pay about 16% and keep $84k. If I make $2 million, I pay 35% and keep $1.3 million. If I make $8 million, I pay 45% and keep $4.4 million. If I make $20 million, I pay 59% and keep $8.2 million. Should I be happier bringing home $84k because I only have to pay 16% of my wages to the government than I would forking over 35% and taking home $1.3 million? No, I'll take the money.
You disagree with athletes being unable to earn over 10 mil past there mid 30s then cite proof like i did. Otherwise, thats just your opinion. It is not a selfish exception. No one is an athlete in the d and d. We obviously do not take each other seriously, but it is clear who used evidence to support their argument and who did not.
nobody has argued that it is a selfish exception. I think but have not argued (suggested perhaps) that it is a nonsensical exception. That's different.
