Would a Personal Salary Cap law be the ultimate championship-winning compromise?

[Millennial_Messiah]

Capitalism and trickle-down economics would be allowed to endure and thrive for the long haul. But, the left wing gets their income distribution without ruining anyone's lives or ability to buy a house.

No limits on business income for a corporation (or a small business partnership's revenue), but cap each individual taxpayer's income at $1.5 Million adjusted gross income per annum. This includes all income... W2s, 1099s, investments, dividends, rentals, note interest, lottos and gambling, overseas income... you get my drift. (It doesn't include non-liquid stuff like increase in business, home or investment equity - only tangible paid-out funds.) All personal income for a given calendar year over $1.5 Million is taxed at a rate of 100%.

Federally ban all personal state income taxes. It's still bizarre that you can have an extra income tax just for living in a different part of the same country as a citizen. Only homeowners and consumers should be taxed at the state level, not simply for happening to work in one state or the other.


Tax the public at only 10% for all (adjusted gross) income of $250,000 or less. This allows not only the poor, but the middle-class to save up to buy things they strive for such as cars and a decent home. Taxes go up significantly on income over that level.

Eliminate the "married filing jointly" and "head of household" tax filing statuses. Each individual must pay their own taxes, with a standard deduction of $18,000 to be raised in the future for inflation.


For the medical industry, there is the caveat: All medical professionals may only earn up to $1 Million per year in adjusted gross income before every cent over that is taxed at 100%. However, all medical malpractice insurance premiums are pre-tax, meaning these annoying and expensive insurance costs are fully deductible and do not count towards a medical professional's AGI, provided this insurance is purchased from a federally recognized insurance company. In addition, all workers deemed by the U.S. government to be working as an employee or contractor for a health insurance company may also only earn up to $1 Million per year in total (adjusted gross) income.


There shall be strict enforcement of this Salary Cap. All persons convicted of committing tax evasion to circumvent this Salary Cap, shall be assessed a lump sum of restitution at the time of their conviction equal to the dollar amount in taxes that they owe, plus a 10% penalty for the first year that they are convicted, a 20% penalty for the second year they are convicted, and a 30% penalty for all following years that they are convicted.

The fraudulent individual will be allowed ninety (90) days to pay this lump sum in full to the IRS (online or by mail) to avert arrest and incarceration, or else face a mandatory sentence of 10 years in regular federal prison for Salary Cap Tax Evasion. In this case, the fraudster must make monthly restitution payments (plus interest) to the IRS while incarcerated, or face a longer sentence. The U.S. government may seize the individual's assets while the fraudster is incarcerated in order to recoup the losses in tax revenue.

[CosmicCowboy]

What the fuck is this?

[DMC]

I'm not reading all that stupid shit.

[rmt]

So the Googles, FBs, Amazons of the future would never be? Over 1.5 million taxed at 100% - what would be the incentive to strive once someone hits $1.5 million? Do you have any understanding of human nature?

[BD24]

https://media.giphy.com/media/aSTJbOerwCKqc/giphy.gif

[koriwhat]

lmao i want to be rich and work my ass off but once i get to 1.5m annually then i'm done trying and fuck everyone from there on!

[midnightpulp]

I don't see any issues with a 70% marginal rate on income above 5 or so million and similar capital gains rate above 1 million. You then put into place strict laws preventing any number of tax loopholes the rich can potentially use to get out of paying their fair share. Let's stop pretending as a country that trickle down works. Provably false with hard statistics. The reason "evil socialism" is gaining steam (and it's not just with young people supposedly indoctrinated by the commie public school system. I used to be more economically Libertarian but our system isn't set up to make laissez faire capitalism viable) is because shit like this unacceptable in "the richest country in the history of the world." People are getting sick of it.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/while-sears-executives-get-25-million-bonuses-laid-workers-struggle-n949446

Some "bootstrap meritocracy" we live in when the executives that were responsible for the decline of the business are getting bonuses.

[AntiChrist]

OP is brave and forward thinking. My only critique would be that those draconian tax rates should only apply to white folks.

[Millennial_Messiah]

I don't see any issues with a 70% marginal rate on income above 5 or so million and similar capital gains rate above 1 million. You then put into place strict laws preventing any number of tax loopholes the rich can potentially use to get out of paying their fair share. Let's stop pretending as a country that trickle down works. Provably false with hard statistics. The reason "evil socialism" is gaining steam (and it's not just with young people supposedly indoctrinated by the commie public school system. I used to be more economically Libertarian but our system isn't set up to make laissez faire capitalism viable) is because shit like this unacceptable in "the richest country in the history of the world." People are getting sick of it.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/while-sears-executives-get-25-million-bonuses-laid-workers-struggle-n949446

Some "bootstrap meritocracy" we live in when the executives that were responsible for the decline of the business are getting bonuses.

The loopholes are a huge problem and one that Trump tax reform tried to curb a little by removing a lot of the itemized deductions, but unfortunately he took away just all the relatively petty ones (for rich peeps) that really only matter to lower and middle class peeps. Pretty much leaving almost everyone who's not near-rich or rich one decent option: take the standard deduction and call it a day.

[rmt]

Say bye-bye to the NBA. I wonder if Lebron would be willing to work for $1.5 million?

[DMC]

I don't see any issues with a 70% marginal rate on income above 5 or so million and similar capital gains rate above 1 million. You then put into place strict laws preventing any number of tax loopholes the rich can potentially use to get out of paying their fair share. Let's stop pretending as a country that trickle down works. Provably false with hard statistics. The reason "evil socialism" is gaining steam (and it's not just with young people supposedly indoctrinated by the commie public school system. I used to be more economically Libertarian but our system isn't set up to make laissez faire capitalism viable) is because shit like this unacceptable in "the richest country in the history of the world." People are getting sick of it.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/while-sears-executives-get-25-million-bonuses-laid-workers-struggle-n949446

Some "bootstrap meritocracy" we live in when the executives that were responsible for the decline of the business are getting bonuses.

So you make 50c a day? Since trickle down doesn't work.

[midnightpulp]

So you make 50c a day? Since trickle down doesn't work.

I would say trickle up is what works, in that when the average Joe has more purchasing power, he has more money to buy the cheap (yet expensively price) plastic crap the like of Apple make.

[rmt]

Say bye-bye to the NBA. I wonder if Lebron would be willing to work for $1.5 million?

It'd be the ultimate in income equality. No matter what your talent level/contribution, NBA players would basically earn the same. Sorry, Lebron, Durant and Curry - tough luck but fair is fair. You'd see a migration of the talent and wealth from this country that would put Jamaica's to shame.

[midnightpulp]

It'd be the ultimate in income equality. No matter what your talent level/contribution, NBA players would basically earn the same. Sorry, Lebron, Durant and Curry - tough luck but fair is fair. You'd see a migration of the talent and wealth in this country that would put Jamaica's to shame.

100% marginal tax rate is obviously unreasonable, but the proposals of Warren and Cortez aren't. We also need to face the fact of how much pure luck factors in the so-called "earning" of wealth. Lebron didn't earn his 6'8" frame. Trump didn't earn his rich father who floated him half-a-billion dollars in loans as Trump was running his casinos into the ground. Do you really think a CEO works 400 times harder than the standard rank-and-file employee (On average, a CEO makes 400 times more than a common employee)? Do you really think we have a "fair" system that only rewards "talent and hard work" when executives are using the 800 billion dollars in bail out money they received following the recession to give themselves bonuses? Or when executives use these tax cuts that are supposed to "trickle down" to buy back stock which boosts the share price and further enriches them (for doing no work at all)?

[Millennial_Messiah]

100% marginal tax rate is obviously unreasonable, but the proposals of Warren and Cortez aren't. We also need to face the fact of how much pure luck factors in the so-called "earning" of wealth. Lebron didn't earn his 6'8" frame. Trump didn't earn his rich father who floated him half-a-billion dollars in loans as Trump was running his casinos into the ground. Do you really think a CEO works 400 times harder than the standard rank-and-file employee (On average, a CEO makes 400 times more than a common employee)? Do you really think we have a "fair" system that only rewards "talent and hard work" when executives are using the 800 billion dollars in bail out money they received following the recession to give themselves bonuses? Or when executives use these tax cuts that are supposed to "trickle down" to buy back stock which boosts the share price and further enriches them (for doing no work at all)?
I agree with this post...

... also, a 70% tax on everything over a million is just that... a 70% tax on everything OVER A MILLION. It's not the same as saying, if you make $2 Million that you'll have to pay 70% of your income and be left with only $666K in take home pay. Some people just don't know how tax brackets work, smh.

And the LeBron stuff is absolutely 100% correct. What did LeBron or Shaq or Tom Brady do to deserve 8 figure pay every year other than winning the genetic lottery? 99.999% of us couldn't sniff these opportunities even if we put in the hardest work in the history of hard working humanity.

[rmt]

100% marginal tax rate is obviously unreasonable, but the proposals of Warren and Cortez aren't. We also need to face the fact of how much pure luck factors in the so-called "earning" of wealth. Lebron didn't earn his 6'8" frame. Trump didn't earn his rich father who floated him half-a-billion dollars in loans as Trump was running his casinos into the ground. Do you really think a CEO works 400 times harder than the standard rank-and-file employee (On average, a CEO makes 400 times more than a common employee)? Do you really think we have a "fair" system that only rewards "talent and hard work" when executives are using the 800 billion dollars in bail out money they received following the recession to give themselves bonuses? Or when executives use these tax cuts that are supposed to "trickle down" to buy back stock which boosts the share price and further enriches them (for doing no work at all)?

I am assuming that you live in the US. If so, do you think that you are lucky to be born/live in this country? Do you agree that you are X times more fortunate/richer than most people on this earth? Do you think you should give up y% of your income to even it out with all those billions of people out there?

And I don't pay my hard-earned money to watch some average joe with average skills play basketball. I could look out my window and watch a pickup game in my driveway, if that were the case.

[DarrinS]

No one earns anything. Just genetics and luck.

-Sad Dems

[midnightpulp]

I am assuming that you live in the US. If so, do you think that you are lucky to be born/live in this country? Do you agree that you are X times more fortunate/richer than most people on this earth? Do you think you should give up y% of your income to even it out with all those billions of people out there?

And I don't pay my hard-earned money to watch some average joe with average skills play basketball. I could look out my window and watch a pickup game in my driveway, if that were the case.

I give to charities, yes. But you're using the false equivalency tactic so common in the "wealth distribution" debate, that a billionaire giving up 70% of his income is the same thing as an average paycheck-to-paycheck living Joe giving up 70% of his income. Does a billionaire who has his net worth reduced down to "only" 300 million suffer any sort of lifestyle change? Not all. Does someone making 70K per year suffer a lifestyle change if they were taxed 70%? Indeed. You basically put their comfortable middle class life below the poverty line. I think many of us Average Joes would love to give more to those "billions of people out there," but how can you expect a worker at Taco Bell to give even 10% of their earnings to the "billions out there?" when they likely need every dime to make ends meet?

Here's an analogy. I don't expect nor demand the minimum wage employee to give to charity even if I do. I have the extra money to do so where they might not. On the same token, a billionaire or those defending billionaires (like yourself) shouldn't expect the middle class to match the percentage of income they give up in taxes, charity, etc.

[midnightpulp]

No one earns anything. Just genetics and luck.

-Sad Dems

Tell me how million dollar executive bonuses are "earned" when said executives ran the company into the ground or even worse, are using free tax payer money to pay themselves bonuses? Tell me how Paris Hilton "earned" her money/inheritance? Tell me how boosted share prices (that further enrich executives) through stock buybacks bought with money saved from tax cuts are "earned?" Do you think Jeff Bezos is a million times smarter and works a million times harder than the guy working in one of Amazon's warehouses?

[DarrinS]

Tell me how million dollar executive bonuses are "earned" when said executives ran the company into the ground or even worse, are using free tax payer money to pay themselves bonuses? Tell me how Paris Hilton "earned" her money/inheritance? Tell me how boosted share prices (that further enrich executives) through stock buybacks bought with money saved from tax cuts are "earned?" Do you think Jeff Bezos is a million times smarter and works a million times harder than the guy working in one of Amazon's warehouses?


I think Kylie Jenner is a billionaire, or soon will be.

I've been working for 30+ years and I'm not even a millionaire. Should I begrudge her success?

Is it "fair"?

Life isn't fair.

[midnightpulp]

I agree with this post...

... also, a 70% tax on everything over a million is just that... a 70% tax on everything OVER A MILLION. It's not the same as saying, if you make $2 Million that you'll have to pay 70% of your income and be left with only $666K in take home pay. Some people just don't know how tax brackets work, smh.

And the LeBron stuff is absolutely 100% correct. What did LeBron or Shaq or Tom Brady do to deserve 8 figure pay every year other than winning the genetic lottery? 99.999% of us couldn't sniff these opportunities even if we put in the hardest work in the history of hard working humanity.

People don't like to face the psychological ego blow that not everything in your life was 100% a result of your blood, sweat, and tears. That doesn't mean you shouldn't be proud of your effort in maximizing your good fortune.

[midnightpulp]

I think Kylie Jenner is a billionaire, or soon will be.

I've been working for 30+ years and I'm not even a millionaire. Should I begrudge her success?

Is it "fair"?

Life isn't fair.

Tell me what prevents humans from trying to make life "fair?" No one is begrudging her success. She's still wealthier than any of us even if taxed twice as high. How does a higher tax rate for her "begrudge her success?"

[DarrinS]

Tell me what prevents humans from trying to make life "fair?" No one is begrudging her success. She's still wealthier than any of us even if taxed twice as high. How does a higher tax rate for her "begrudge her success?"

Why do "we" deserve a larger chunk of her money?

[rmt]

I give to charities, yes. But you're using the false equivalency tactic so common in the "wealth distribution" debate, that a billionaire giving up 70% of his income is the same thing as an average paycheck-to-paycheck living Joe giving up 70% of his income. Does a billionaire who has his net worth reduced down to "only" 300 million suffer any sort of lifestyle change? Not all. Does someone making 70K per year suffer a lifestyle change if they were taxed 70%? Indeed. You basically put their comfortable middle class life below the poverty line. I think many of us Average Joes would love to give more to those "billions of people out there," but how can you expect a worker at Taco Bell to give even 10% of their earnings to the "billions out there?" when they likely need every dime to make ends meet?

Here's an analogy. I don't expect nor demand the minimum wage employee to give to charity even if I do. I have the extra money to do so where they might not. On the same token, a billionaire or those defending billionaires (like yourself) shouldn't expect the middle class to match the percentage of income they give up in taxes, charity, etc.

In comparison to the rest of the world, that 70k per year is like that 1.5 million per year OP wants taxed at 100%. You (I don't mean YOU personally) don't think so because you THINK you are struggling to make ends - but you have internet connection, computer, I'm guessing some phone, a standard of living which is like being a millionaire elsewhere. What I described earlier relative to the rest of the world is EXACTLY the same as the 1.5 million to a "struggling" average US joe. Your reaction to my suggestion that you give away y% of your income to "even" it up is exactly how someone who makes 1.5 million would react too.

[DarrinS]

I agree with this post...

... also, a 70% tax on everything over a million is just that... a 70% tax on everything OVER A MILLION. It's not the same as saying, if you make $2 Million that you'll have to pay 70% of your income and be left with only $666K in take home pay. Some people just don't know how tax brackets work, smh.

And the LeBron stuff is absolutely 100% correct. What did LeBron or Shaq or Tom Brady do to deserve 8 figure pay every year other than winning the genetic lottery? 99.999% of us couldn't sniff these opportunities even if we put in the hardest work in the history of hard working humanity.


Brady? Really?

Drafted 199th

Just lucky, suppose.

[midnightpulp]

Why do "we" deserve a larger chunk of her money?

Because it's morally right. I think "you" deserve a larger chunk of my money than a minimum wage fast food worker since I can afford to pay more in taxes than them. Why is this idea so controversial? I get it, bootstrap Americans and all that, we're a nation that's self-reliant and doesn't whine, but as long as shit like layoffs of workers when companies are posting record profits is happening in the "greatest in country in the world," I think the whining is justified.

[DarrinS]

Yes, there are people luckier than you.

There are also people who work harder and a better than you.

Don't be bitter

[rmt]

Winning the House must have gone to people's heads - emboldened these ideas. That NY abortion bill, this VA governor and now this - 100% over 1.5 million or 70% over 1 million - smh.

[Millennial_Messiah]

I give to charities, yes. But you're using the false equivalency tactic so common in the "wealth distribution" debate, that a billionaire giving up 70% of his income is the same thing as an average paycheck-to-paycheck living Joe giving up 70% of his income. Does a billionaire who has his net worth reduced down to "only" 300 million suffer any sort of lifestyle change? Not all. Does someone making 70K per year suffer a lifestyle change if they were taxed 70%? Indeed. You basically put their comfortable middle class life below the poverty line. I think many of us Average Joes would love to give more to those "billions of people out there," but how can you expect a worker at Taco Bell to give even 10% of their earnings to the "billions out there?" when they likely need every dime to make ends meet?

Here's an analogy. I don't expect nor demand the minimum wage employee to give to charity even if I do. I have the extra money to do so where they might not. On the same token, a billionaire or those defending billionaires (like yourself) shouldn't expect the middle class to match the percentage of income they give up in taxes, charity, etc.

a 10% tax rate with an 18,000 standard deduction gives Taco Bell kids a tax-free job and the average middle class guy making 70,000 a livable take-home-pay of 63,000. (San Francisco Bay Area not withstanding. 70K in SF puts you on par with a chicken butcher in frickin' Malaysia.)

[DarrinS]

Because it's morally right. I think "you" deserve a larger chunk of my money than a minimum wage fast food worker since I can afford to pay more in taxes than them. Why is this idea so controversial? I get it, bootstrap Americans and all that, we're a nation that's self-reliant and doesn't whine, but as long as shit like layoffs of workers when companies are posting record profits is happening in the "greatest in country in the world," I think the whining is justified.

We already have a progressive tax system.

[rmt]

Because it's morally right. I think "you" deserve a larger chunk of my money than a minimum wage fast food worker since I can afford to pay more in taxes than them. Why is this idea so controversial? I get it, bootstrap Americans and all that, we're a nation that's self-reliant and doesn't whine, but as long as shit like layoffs of workers when companies are posting record profits is happening in the "greatest in country in the world," I think the whining is justified.

Where is your morality about the NY abortion bill or what that VA governor said?

[DarrinS]

a 10% tax rate with an 18,000 standard deduction gives Taco Bell kids a tax-free job and the average middle class guy making 70,000 a livable take-home-pay of 63,000. (San Francisco Bay Area not withstanding. 70K in SF puts you on par with a chicken butcher in frickin' Malaysia.)

Blue Mecca, SF problems.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Because it's morally right. I think "you" deserve a larger chunk of my money than a minimum wage fast food worker since I can afford to pay more in taxes than them. Why is this idea so controversial? I get it, bootstrap Americans and all that, we're a nation that's self-reliant and doesn't whine, but as long as shit like layoffs of workers when companies are posting record profits is happening in the "greatest in country in the world," I think the whining is justified.

I agree

And the medical profiteering industry pisses me off by far the most

The big American insurance company execs making $20M a year salary each + big bonuses + big money off investments, while the people on the floor working for them are lucky to make $45K a year

despicable

[DarrinS]

Medical profiteering? OMG

[midnightpulp]

In comparison to the rest of the world, that 70k per year is like that 1.5 million per year OP wants taxed at 100%. You (I don't mean YOU personally) don't think so because you THINK you are struggling to make ends - but you have internet connection, computer, I'm guessing some phone, a standard of living which is like being a millionaire elsewhere. What I described earlier relative to the rest of the world is EXACTLY the same as the 1.5 million to a "struggling" average US joe. Your reaction to my suggestion that you give away y% of your income to "even" it up is exactly how someone who makes 1.5 million would react too.

I didn't react like a billionaire would react, though. I clearly said that I should be expected to give up more than the Taco Bell worker since I have more disposable income to allow that. Billionaires (and their defenders) often propose a flat tax or some other nonsense using the "relative" argument. If I expect myself to give up more than the Taco Bell worker, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect those with more wealth than me to give up more than I do. Why is this bad?

[Millennial_Messiah]

Blue Mecca, SF problems.

also, I did my math wrong. The guy making 70,000 with an 18K standard deduction and a 10% tax would have 64,800 left over, not 63K. Factor in Medicare and SS (the latter of which should also go the way of the dodo) would bring it down to around 63K.

[DarrinS]

It's billionaires vs taco bell workers, y'all.

:lmao

[midnightpulp]

We already have a progressive tax system.

Cuts off at 39%, whether you make 600K per year or 60 million per year. Not progressive enough.

[midnightpulp]

Medical profiteering? OMG

Yep, it's a totally right thing to do to raise a drug price by 400% when a competitor drops out. Fun fact: A lot of that price gouging profiteering is being funded on your dime. We pay near the most per capita in tax dollars for health care, so when a Medicare recipient gets a 100K bill for a 2 hour hospital stay (which is price gouging/profiteering), you're paying for it. Should make you angry.

[DarrinS]

also, I did my math wrong. The guy making 70,000 with an 18K standard deduction and a 10% tax would have 64,800 left over, not 63K. Factor in Medicare and SS (the latter of which should also go the way of the dodo) would bring it down to around 63K.

SF is a fucked up city. It's covered with feces and hardly anyone can afford to live there.

Pelosi is your rep, if you have any complaints.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Cuts off at 39%, whether you make 600K per year or 60 million per year. Not progressive enough.

Agreed. What does the dude want, a :lmao flat tax with no standard deduction? So the poor kid making $15K a year as a full time dishwasher at Cheesecake Factory to make ends meet can pay the same 10% as the pampered child of a celebrity who never had to lift a finger? So we can drive the nation trillions further into debt? We'd have to steal from something in that case... and the GOP would hate to see it be the military, and the older conservatives also don't want Medicare cut, but there isn't a whole lot left...

[Millennial_Messiah]

Yep, it's a totally right thing to do to raise a drug price by 400% when a competitor drops out. Fun fact: A lot of that price gouging profiteering is being funded on your dime. We pay near the most per capita in tax dollars for health care, so when a Medicare recipient gets a 100K bill for a 2 hour hospital stay (which is price gouging/profiteering), you're paying for it. Should make you angry.

The drugs are low hanging fruit. Don't fool yourself, the surgeons are the biggest culprit. My mom's heart doctor charges $250K per pacemaker surgery and he does 3-4 operations per day and only works 3 days per week. That's well over a fucking million a week. That greedy pig should be in jail, not in the hospital... but the problem is, the competition is all the same these days in this fucked up country...

[Spurminator]

No one earns anything. Just genetics and luck.

-Sad Dems


Life isn't fair.


Why do "we" deserve a larger chunk of her money?


Yes, there are people luckier than you.

There are also people who work harder and a better than you.

Don't be bitter


It's billionaires vs taco bell workers, y'all. :lmao

You're embarrassing yourself. MP is giving you way better responses than you deserve and you're going into derp mode. Try harder. Especially if you're going to mock high schoolers for their debate skills in another thread on the same night.

[midnightpulp]

Where is your morality about the NY abortion bill or what that VA governor said?

I don't know the fine print of the bill, but I do support late term abortion if: The mother's is unlikely to survive to the birth, the fetus is 100% unlikely to survive the birth. The latter is a gray area, though, since it's possible, even if it's a million to one shot, the fetus could perhaps survive. The moral decision in the former should be up to the mother and father in deciding whose life is more valuable: mother or child. I can't determine that, obviously.

[Millennial_Messiah]

SF is a fucked up city. It's covered with feces and hardly anyone can afford to live there.

Pelosi is your rep, if you have any complaints.

SF is disgusting. But Silicon Valley is pretty nice. It's all expensive as shit, though.

[Millennial_Messiah]

I don't know the fine print of the bill, but I do support late term abortion if: The mother's is unlikely to survive to the birth, the fetus is 100% unlikely to survive the birth. The latter is a gray area, though, since it's possible, even if it's a million to one shot, the fetus could perhaps survive. The moral decision in the former should be up to the mother and father in deciding whose life is more valuable: mother or child. I can't determine that, obviously.

You've got to go mother, 100% of the time. It's not even a decision at all. You go with the established citizen every time. Whose f'd up idea was it to even consider that a decision? :lmao

The far right pretends to care so much about unborn babies, but they don't give a rat's ass about people when they are actually alive... hence why the U.S. ranks 41st in life expectancy, and falling a little every year :lol


#41stPlaceYEAH!

[DarrinS]

SF is disgusting. But Silicon Valley is pretty nice. It's all expensive as shit, though.

The most progressive cities have the worst wealth inequality.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The most progressive cities have the worst wealth inequality.

And ironically the most capitalism. You think that Facebook, Google, Twitter, Instagram, and all the rest aren't laughing all the way to the bank...? Hah!

[midnightpulp]

You're embarrassing yourself. MP is giving you way better responses than you deserve and you're going into derp mode. Try harder. Especially if you're going to mock high schoolers for their debate skills in another thread on the same night.

I understand Darrin's attitude. Red blooded Americans hate "whiners" and have mythologized self-determination and independence to unrealistic levels, so no prideful Americans want to come off as "needing" a billionaire's money or any other kind of "hand out" in order to succeed. Ironic thing is that many of these billionaires got handouts from mommy and daddy, the government, or in the case of athletes, actors, etc won the genetic lottery (a handout by nature). And maybe people like Darrin have the economic freedom to reject such handouts. Great! But many don't have the luxury, and might not be able to "bootstrap" themselves into the American dream. Been proven that a person is likely is stay in the same economic class as the one their parents were in.

[midnightpulp]

The most progressive cities have the worst wealth inequality.

How about the most progressive countries?

[DarrinS]

How about the most progressive countries?

Which ones are those?

[midnightpulp]

The drugs are low hanging fruit. Don't fool yourself, the surgeons are the biggest culprit. My mom's heart doctor charges $250K per pacemaker surgery and he does 3-4 operations per day and only works 3 days per week. That's well over a fucking million a week. That greedy pig should be in jail, not in the hospital... but the problem is, the competition is all the same these days in this fucked up country...

The college for profit industry is another sham. Oh, but cheap tuition or free school? Socialism. Here's a story of the CEO Cisco systems:


Their words that stuck with me weren’t business tips or inspirational tales about chasing dreams, but the story about how John Morgridge got into Madison.
“We came to the university (in 1951) with our Wauwatosa High School diplomas, no SATs, no applications, no essays to write,” John said. “Just our diploma, and 75 dollars for tuition.”

https://doorcountypulse.com/college-debt-retire-the-american-bootstrap-myth/

The current price to go to Madison is like over 20K per year. College costs is another fact that debunks the "bootstrap myth." When tuition is that high, only the fortunate can afford to really go without being saddled with a mountain of debt post graduation. The modern Conservative idealizes the 1950s, but really doesn't want to take us back there when: Marginal tax rates were 70-80 percent on income over 250K (which correlated to the most robust middle class in maybe human history). College was relatively inexpensive. 200-300.00 per year. Adjusting for inflation: 2700.00. Eisenhower was proposing a universal health care system.

[midnightpulp]

Which ones are those?

Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Germany, etc.

https://ceoworld.biz/2015/10/20/top-25-countries-with-the-highest-individual-income-tax-rates-in-the-world-2015/

[DarrinS]

I understand Darrin's attitude. Red blooded Americans hate "whiners" and have mythologized self-determination and independence to unrealistic levels, so no prideful Americans want to come off as "needing" a billionaire's money or any other kind of "hand out" in order to succeed. Ironic thing is that many of these billionaires got handouts from mommy and daddy, the government, or in the case of athletes, actors, etc won the genetic lottery (a handout by nature). And maybe people like Darrin have the economic freedom to reject such handouts. Great! But many don't have the luxury, and might not be able to "bootstrap" themselves into the American dream. Been proven that a person is likely is stay in the same economic class as the one their parents were in.

I lived in a trailer park with my mom and sister. She's a doctor and I'm an engineer. People can pull themselves up, as they've always could. Not everyone is going to start a Microsoft or Apple, but nothing is stopping them.

[DarrinS]

Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Germany, etc.

https://ceoworld.biz/2015/10/20/top-25-countries-with-the-highest-individual-income-tax-rates-in-the-world-2015/


I don't want America to emulate any of those countries.

[midnightpulp]

I lived in a trailer park with my mom and sister. She's a doctor and I'm an engineer. People can pull themselves up, as they've always could. Not everyone is going to start a Microsoft or Apple, but nothing is stopping them.

I take you're around 50ish? Cost of education back then? Ever take an IQ test? If you're an engineer, I'm guessing it's at the very least 115+. IQs aren't "earned." Now while I think IQ is an overrated metric for judging the complete mental ability of a person, it does highly correlate with income level. Do you honestly think someone born with a 90 IQ through no fault of their own can "bootstrap" themselves into becoming an engineer, doctor, etc? There's a lot that can stop people, nature, nurture, etc that is out of their control. This doesn't mean give up and ask the government for everything, but even though opportunity might be equal (which I disagree with, since people born into connected families and such will have a huge advantage in that regard), the distribution of natural ability is unfortunately not equal, and that lack of natural ability will limit their earning potential, especially with the decline of lower skilled blue collar jobs in favor of IT centric jobs.

[Will Hunting]

I don't want America to emulate any of those countries.
But you were talking about wealth inequality. How does the wealth inequality in those country’s compare to America’s wealth inequality?

[FrostKing]

Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Germany, etc.

https://ceoworld.biz/2015/10/20/top-25-countries-with-the-highest-individual-income-tax-rates-in-the-world-2015/
The average citizen from those nations would be cream of the crop American in terms of intelligence, morals/respect and goals. I think it's a cute comparison but America is the land of entertainment

[Winehole23]

But you were talking about wealth inequality. How does the wealth inequality in those country’s compare to America’s wealth inequality?What's the fun in being successful if you don't have paupers to jeer at for their bad life decisions?

[DarrinS]

I take you're around 50ish? Cost of education back then? Ever take an IQ test? If you're an engineer, I'm guessing it's at the very least 115+. IQs aren't "earned." Now while I think IQ is an overrated metric for judging the complete mental ability of a person, it does highly correlate with income level. Do you honestly think someone born with a 90 IQ through no fault of their own can "bootstrap" themselves into becoming an engineer, doctor, etc? There's a lot that can stop people, nature, nurture, etc that is out of their control. This doesn't mean give up and ask the government for everything, but even though opportunity might be equal (which I disagree with, since people born into connected families and such will have a huge advantage in that regard), the distribution of natural ability is unfortunately not equal, and that lack of natural ability will limit their earning potential, especially with the decline of lower skilled blue collar jobs in favor of IT centric jobs.


I turn 50 this year. You're wading into uncomfortable territory with the IQ stuff.

[midnightpulp]

But you were talking about wealth inequality. How does the wealth inequality in those country’s compare to America’s wealth inequality?

I think the main issue in not being able to convince conservatives in this debate is the way they psychologically project themselves onto the rich, thinking their 100K per year income is somehow equivalent to a 500 million dollar per year income. "Well, I wouldn't want people taking 70% of my money, so it's not fair that I ask Mark Zuckerberg to." I get the logic, but it falls apart when you realize that 100K is not in any way equivalent to 10, 20, 100 million dollars.

In any other situation, the logic here would be clear. If a starving man walked into Burger King and you saw a fat ass with 12 burgers in front of him vs. a dirt faced kid nibbling on a Chicken Nugget, no sane person would ask the kid to give the starving man anything and ask the fat ass to give up one or two of his burgers.

[DarrinS]

I think the main issue in not being able to convince conservatives in this debate is the way they psychologically project themselves onto the rich, thinking their 100K per year income is somehow equivalent to a 500 million dollar per year income. "Well, I wouldn't want people taking 70% of my money, so it's not fair that I ask Mark Zuckerberg to." I get the logic, but it falls apart when you realize that 100K is not in any way equivalent to 10, 20, 100 million dollars.

In any other situation, the logic here would be clear. If a starving man walked into Burger King and you saw a fat ass with 12 burgers in front of him vs. a dirt faced kid nibbling on a Chicken Nugget, no sane person would ask the kid to give the starving man anything and ask the fat ass to give up one or two of his burgers.



This is an an excellent analogy, if there is one lard ass per one starving kid.

I get the whole "soak the rich" bit. The problem is, there aren't enough of them.

How many people make, say, 10M+ annually?

There are over 300M people in the US.

[midnightpulp]

I turn 50 this year. You're wading into uncomfortable territory with the IQ stuff.

How so? If you think I'm hinting at the Race/IQ debate, I think it's bullshit. IQ (and a psychologically healthy mind in general) is largely affected prenatal, namely the amount of nutrition the unborn receives. Also affecting prenatal development is how much (or lack thereof) stress the mother is under during pregnancy. This is why those Transracial adoption studies "race realists" try to use to say blacks are genetically inclined to be less intelligent are also bullshit. Doesn't take into account the prenatal environment.

[rmt]

This is an an excellent analogy, if there is one lard ass per one starving kid.

I get the whole "soak the rich" bit. The problem is, there aren't enough of them.

How many people make, say, 10M+ annually?

There are over 300M people in the US.

Funny how the "rich" went from $10 million (OCA) to 1.5 million (early thread) to 1 million (later in thread).

[rmt]

I hope in this US with either 100% tax over 1.5 million or 70% tax over 1 million, we still have the ability to buy access to international sporting events - because no world class athlete will be coming here to play. No more Federer in the later stage of his career, no NBA-quality basketball player (they'll be playing in EuroLeague or China), no Brady this weekend, no Serena, no ...

[boutons_deux]

So the Googles, FBs, Amazons of the future would never be? Over 1.5 million taxed at 100% - what would be the incentive to strive once someone hits $1.5 million? Do you have any understanding of human nature?

your widespread ignorance is showing

human nature? :lol

Scandinavian countries have very high top brackets but "human nature" has not killed wealthy people's incentive

a much more relevant question is why billionaires, even millionaires, are so obsessed with protecting/increasing their wealth (by corrupting politicians, by criminal tax evasion) when they can never possibly spend it all.

[CosmicCowboy]

The drugs are low hanging fruit. Don't fool yourself, the surgeons are the biggest culprit. My mom's heart doctor charges $250K per pacemaker surgery and he does 3-4 operations per day and only works 3 days per week. That's well over a fucking million a week. That greedy pig should be in jail, not in the hospital... but the problem is, the competition is all the same these days in this fucked up country...

250K?

I think you have your numbers wrong. 25K should be more like it and that's for the device, the hospital, nurses, surgeon, anesthesiologist etc. Not saying the surgeon isn't making good money...he probably makes in excess of $500,000 a year but no fucking way he is making a million a week.

[boutons_deux]

That time Donald Trump proposed a 14.5 percent wealth tax

1999 was a different world.

Indeed, it’s been kicking around in one form or another since the late 1990s (https://www.vox.com/2015/3/18/8244115/donald-trump-wealth-tax), when an influential then-independent rolled out a proposal that he framed as a way to reduce the national debt while preserving the interests of the 99 percent.

Here’s how the plan’s architect described it:

“By my calculations,

1 percent of Americans,

who control 90 percent of the wealth in this country,

would be affected by my plan.

The other 99 percent of the people would get deep reductions in their federal income taxes.”

His name? Donald Trump.

https://www.vox.com/2019/1/31/18203999/donald-trump-wealth-tax-14-5-percent

[SpursforSix]

Say bye-bye to the NBA. I wonder if Lebron would be willing to work for $1.5 million?

Makes no sense.
If there is a salary cap for everyone, then the best athletes would still want to play. That's the most anyone can make in the OP's dumb ass scheme.
These guys wouldn't be looking for some other way to earn that.

[FrostKing]

Makes no sense.
If there is a salary cap for everyone, then the best athletes would still want to play. That's the most anyone can make in the OP's dumb ass scheme.
These guys wouldn't be looking for some other way to earn that.
They would play overseas. Team from Saudi Arabia would offer him more than even the Lakers are currently paying

[SpursforSix]

They would play overseas. Team from Saudi Arabia would offer him more than even the Lakers are currently paying

I thought this was a universal salary cap.

[FrostKing]

I thought this was a universal salary cap.
Oh okay that's a dumb discussion.

[Winehole23]

Remove the Social Security cap, reinstate the estate tax, treat capital gains like regular income.

Why should investors and heirs of wealth be treated better than ordinary working folks?

[boutons_deux]

Why should investors and heirs of wealth be treated better than ordinary working folks?

The Wealthy Class War LIE is that low capital gains tax encourages investment, but recent PROOF of that LIE is the oligarchy's tax cut resulted in $100Bs of (formerly illegal until Repug legalized them) stock buybacks and almost no capex.

The UnEarned Capitalists bought low tax rate, while making sure Labor pays earned income regressive taxes through the nose.

[SpursforSix]

Oh okay that's a dumb discussion.

The whole thing is a dumb discussion.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The college for profit industry is another sham. Oh, but cheap tuition or free school? Socialism. Here's a story of the CEO Cisco systems:



https://doorcountypulse.com/college-debt-retire-the-american-bootstrap-myth/

The current price to go to Madison is like over 20K per year. College costs is another fact that debunks the "bootstrap myth." When tuition is that high, only the fortunate can afford to really go without being saddled with a mountain of debt post graduation. The modern Conservative idealizes the 1950s, but really doesn't want to take us back there when: Marginal tax rates were 70-80 percent on income over 250K (which correlated to the most robust middle class in maybe human history). College was relatively inexpensive. 200-300.00 per year. Adjusting for inflation: 2700.00. Eisenhower was proposing a universal health care system.

then again, when you adjust that 250K for inflation, it's probably a million and change at the very least.


And back then, college was a lot more optional than it is today. You could get a decent paying office job (with potential to move up ladders) with a HS diploma and a good work ethic back then... now, a bachelor's is required to sniff the inside of an office. Or... you have an "in" with someone or you're a hot and willing chick with a boss who really loves BJ's. But a regular guy with an average social network... tough shit without that degree.


I also think college is a big problem. Professors, deans etc aren't quite as greedy as surgeons and insurance company execs, but they're no saints and they piss me off because they're usually left wing but hypocritical because of the large pieces of the pie they take for themselves.

I think companies should consider more non-college-degreed young candidates for skilled jobs because you can just as easily get a good free education on Google, which also shows that you're a self learner as opposed to someone who gets schoolwork done just for a grade or so their parents don't kill them.

[DMC]

I would say trickle up is what works, in that when the average Joe has more purchasing power, he has more money to buy the cheap (yet expensively price) plastic crap the like of Apple make.

How did Joe get more purchasing power?

[Millennial_Messiah]

250K?

I think you have your numbers wrong. 25K should be more like it and that's for the device, the hospital, nurses, surgeon, anesthesiologist etc. Not saying the surgeon isn't making good money...he probably makes in excess of $500,000 a year but no fucking way he is making a million a week.
Nope, the bill was $256K, my mom is on Obamacare so she paid her $1000 MOOP and the insurance company covered the other $249K + another few thousand in specialists, equipment costs, fees etc.


I don't know if you understand what's really going on in the Shitmerican healthcare profit industry..

[DMC]

Remove the Social Security cap, reinstate the estate tax, treat capital gains like regular income.

Why should investors and heirs of wealth be treated better than ordinary working folks?

Because it's already been taxed once. Why tax the same money over and over again? Just because you don't like wealthy people because you're not wealthy doesn't mean they should be punished for being wealthy. You don't want to disincentivize success. Socialist always seem to think success is evil. It's usually the unsuccessful socialists.

So many people here eager to tax the demographic that they don't belong to. No one here is suggesting raising taxes on themselves though for some reason.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Remove the Social Security cap, reinstate the estate tax, treat capital gains like regular income.

Why should investors and heirs of wealth be treated better than ordinary working folks?
I agree with this, but SS is garbage and should be abolished. People should learn to save.


The Wealthy Class War LIE is that low capital gains tax encourages investment, but recent PROOF of that LIE is the oligarchy's tax cut resulted in $100Bs of (formerly illegal until Repug legalized them) stock buybacks and almost no capex.

The UnEarned Capitalists bought low tax rate, while making sure Labor pays earned income regressive taxes through the nose.
The first 300-400k in capital gains should be free, but it should go up steadily from there

[CosmicCowboy]

I see no reason that online degrees can't be designed and executed to be just as good as 4-5 years of fucking around on a physical campus.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Because it's already been taxed once. Why tax the same money over and over again? Just because you don't like wealthy people because you're not wealthy doesn't mean they should be punished for being wealthy. You don't want to disincentivize success. Socialist always seem to think success is evil. It's usually the unsuccessful socialists.

So many people here eager to tax the demographic that they don't belong to. No one here is suggesting raising taxes on themselves though for some reason.

Impoverished (<48k) and lower middle class people should never be taxed above 10%. Also, state income taxes should be abolished.

[Millennial_Messiah]

I see no reason that online degrees can't be designed and executed to be just as good as 4-5 years of fucking around on a physical campus.

I agree 110%. And it shouldn't cost more than around $1200 a year or so.

[Millennial_Messiah]

They would play overseas. Team from Saudi Arabia would offer him more than even the Lakers are currently paying


I thought this was a universal salary cap.

As long as he is a U.S. citizen, he would have to pay U.S. taxes on all income including overseas income, plus he might face taxes in Saudi Arabia (not to mention possible religious taxes over there).

He would have to voluntarily relinquish U.S. citizenship to avoid these taxes, meaning he would have to wait years + apply for a visa and begin the regular, and arduous, immigration process to the US if he ever wanted to come back to the US.

[Millennial_Messiah]

I think the main issue in not being able to convince conservatives in this debate is the way they psychologically project themselves onto the rich, thinking their 100K per year income is somehow equivalent to a 500 million dollar per year income. "Well, I wouldn't want people taking 70% of my money, so it's not fair that I ask Mark Zuckerberg to." I get the logic, but it falls apart when you realize that 100K is not in any way equivalent to 10, 20, 100 million dollars.

In any other situation, the logic here would be clear. If a starving man walked into Burger King and you saw a fat ass with 12 burgers in front of him vs. a dirt faced kid nibbling on a Chicken Nugget, no sane person would ask the kid to give the starving man anything and ask the fat ass to give up one or two of his burgers.
I can attest to the fact that my 109K 2018 income (living in Dallas) is NOT rich or upper-middle class by any standards. It's middle-middle-class at best.

[Spurminator]

Because it's already been taxed once. Why tax the same money over and over again? Just because you don't like wealthy people because you're not wealthy doesn't mean they should be punished for being wealthy. You don't want to disincentivize success. Socialist always seem to think success is evil. It's usually the unsuccessful socialists.

So many people here eager to tax the demographic that they don't belong to. No one here is suggesting raising taxes on themselves though for some reason.

Gains have not been taxed already. If I buy a lottery ticket for $2, that $2 comes from my post-tax income. I still have to pay taxes on the jackpot if I win, because that's new money.

The current system over-incentivizes passive income from investment.

[BD24]

:lol at anyone trying to engage in discussion with Andrews dumb ass

[Will Hunting]

Because it's already been taxed once. Why tax the same money over and over again? Just because you don't like wealthy people because you're not wealthy doesn't mean they should be punished for being wealthy. You don't want to disincentivize success. Socialist always seem to think success is evil. It's usually the unsuccessful socialists.

So many people here eager to tax the demographic that they don't belong to. No one here is suggesting raising taxes on themselves though for some reason.

I'd argue "double taxation" is a reality everyone has to live with and there's no way around it. When I pay sales tax on after tax earnings that I spend, isn't that double taxation? That taxation makes even less sense imo since is disincentivizes the spending that's needed for a strong economy. When a homeowner has to pay property taxes on a home purchased with after tax earnings, how is that not double taxation? Seems like the sales tax and property tax both hit the actual earner of the money that's being "double taxed" harder than the estate tax does, since the estate tax is only hitting the heir who did jack shit to earn his/her estate other than be born into the right family. The "double taxation" argument isn't consistently applied, it comes across as an arbitrary rule that the wealthy use to justify why their taxes should be lower.

The ways income is taxed will always need to change with the times (i.e., it became untenable to have no income tax in the country during the industrial revolution), and the era we're in now requires heavier taxation on capital generated income simply because there's more of it than ever before and there's also less labor generated income (if we're looking at it as a percentage of total income). Much of the income-generating work that was done by humans 50 years ago is now done by computers/machines/etc., and there's only going to be more and more human income-generation that's automated. Unless there's a substantial change in tax policy that properly reflects where income is generated then we'll have a country with no middle class to speak of and a government that can't provide the most basic of services.

Regarding what I pay in taxes, my tax rate for 2018 was effectively 30% (just under 100k of total taxes, including payroll, on 326k of gross income). I'm not exactly starving to death on 226k of after tax income with no wife or kids to provide for, so not complaining about how much I paid, but I don't think I'm the one who should be paying higher taxes when people making millions in capital gains only pay 20% and also when people are inheriting 8+ figure fortunes that are sheltered from virtually any estate tax at all in spite of not doing a lick of work to earn it. Seeing that this country is $21T in debt, I'd be happy to pay more if others were paying more, but as it stands people in my demographic or similar demographics (6 figures of regular income with little to no deductions or exemptions) are the ones carrying the burden and giving the biggest chunk of their income away, in spite of the fact we benefit the least. As it stands I'm already, among other things, making the maximum contribution to a social security program that'll be bankrupt before I ever collect anything and paying for the healthcare of old people and poor people when my healthcare is 100% privately funded, so I don't think it's unreasonable for me to say that I'm paying my fair share :lol

[DMC]

Impoverished (<48k) and lower middle class people should never be taxed above 10%. Also, state income taxes should be abolished.

No reasons?

[spurraider21]

capital gains should just be more progressive than they currently are. i'm fine with them being lower, dollar for dollar, than income tax, because capital gains are derived from risk investments, which are beneficial to the economy. after a certain point, they should level off though

but the ability to have your earnings reflect as capital gains rather than income is not one that is equally accessible to everybody. its the wealthy that substantially benefit from that ability. steve jobs was a multi billionaire with a salary of $1. a middle class or even upper middle class w2 earner doesnt have that same flexibility

[Millennial_Messiah]

I'd argue "double taxation" is a reality everyone has to live with and there's no way around it. When I pay sales tax on after tax earnings that I spend, isn't that double taxation? That taxation makes even less sense imo since is disincentivizes the spending that's needed for a strong economy. When a homeowner has to pay property taxes on a home purchased with after tax earnings, how is that not double taxation? Seems like the sales tax and property tax both hit the actual earner of the money that's being "double taxed" harder than the estate tax does, since the estate tax is only hitting the heir who did jack shit to earn his/her estate other than be born into the right family. The "double taxation" argument isn't consistently applied, it comes across as an arbitrary rule that the wealthy use to justify why their taxes should be lower.

The ways income is taxed will always need to change with the times (i.e., it became untenable to have no income tax in the country during the industrial revolution), and the era we're in now requires heavier taxation on capital generated income simply because there's more of it than ever before and there's also less labor generated income (if we're looking at it as a percentage of total income). Much of the income-generating work that was done by humans 50 years ago is now done by computers/machines/etc., and there's only going to be more and more human income-generation that's automated. Unless there's a substantial change in tax policy that properly reflects where income is generated then we'll have a country with no middle class to speak of and a government that can't provide the most basic of services.

Regarding what I pay in taxes, my tax rate for 2018 was effectively 30% (just under 100k of total taxes, including payroll, on 326k of gross income). I'm not exactly starving to death on 226k of after tax income with no wife or kids to provide for, so not complaining about how much I paid, but I don't think I'm the one who should be paying higher taxes when people making millions in capital gains only pay 20% and also when people are inheriting 8+ figure fortunes that are sheltered from virtually any estate tax at all in spite of not doing a lick of work to earn it. Seeing that this country is $21T in debt, I'd be happy to pay more if others were paying more, but as it stands people in my demographic or similar demographics (6 figures of regular income with little to no deductions or exemptions) are the ones carrying the burden and giving the biggest chunk of their income away, in spite of the fact we benefit the least. As it stands I'm already, among other things, making the maximum contribution to a social security program that'll be bankrupt before I ever collect anything and paying for the healthcare of old people and poor people when my healthcare is 100% privately funded, so I don't think it's unreasonable for me to say that I'm paying my fair share :lol

Excellent post.

Truth of the matter is, the most financially sound decision for a man who makes good money is to marry a career-oriented, educated woman who makes good money herself, and to NOT have children. It is impossible to get enough tax breaks from having kids to recover and recoup the enormous cost of children. Even if you're not paying for their college or anything else past high school graduation, it's still $250K over ~18 years per child.

[rmt]

As long as he is a U.S. citizen, he would have to pay U.S. taxes on all income including overseas income, plus he might face taxes in Saudi Arabia (not to mention possible religious taxes over there).

He would have to voluntarily relinquish U.S. citizenship to avoid these taxes, meaning he would have to wait years + apply for a visa and begin the regular, and arduous, immigration process to the US if he ever wanted to come back to the US.

Do you really think that Lebron James would wait years and go through a regular, arduous process to get into ANY country?

[Millennial_Messiah]

Do you really think that Lebron James would wait years and go through a regular, arduous process to get into ANY country?

Nope. Hence why he's a lazy ass that doesn't deserve a penny more than my hypothetical salary cap.

[boutons_deux]

Do you really think that Lebron James would wait years and go through a regular, arduous process to get into ANY country?

Many athletes immigrate to Monaco for tax reasons

[diego]

Unfortunately we've reached the point where it doesn't really matter what tax policy any country has, there will always be another with more favorable conditions for those with the means to use shell corps and lawyers to get out of paying. This book hasn't reached me yet but it seems pertinent to share here
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiL0ZaGp5ngAhWBI7kGHb94CY4QzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fbooks%2F20 18%2Fsep%2F07%2Fmoneyland-oliver-bullough-review&psig=AOvVaw0jUBtKtMuIpNDn4J8afwSj&ust=1549068247313638

[boutons_deux]

I'm pretty sure the USA is unique among industrial nations in taxing its citizens planet-wide

Taxpayers Living Abroad

If you are a U.S. citizen or resident alien,

the rules for filing income, estate, and gift tax returns and paying estimated tax are generally the same whether you are in the United States or abroad.

Your worldwide income is subject to U.S. income tax, regardless of where you reside.

https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/taxpayers-living-abroad

Very weird that the Repugs haven't killed this IRS rule

[diego]

That's what shell corps are for.. iirc there are tax havens within the US legally anyway

[midnightpulp]

How did Joe get more purchasing power?

Less tax burden. The data is out. Since the Reagan tax cuts, middle class wealth has risen a whopping 1.5%, obviously well behind the rate of inflation. It doesn't trickle down, unfortunately.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Less tax burden. The data is out. Since the Reagan tax cuts, middle class wealth has risen a whopping 1.5%, obviously well behind the rate of inflation. It doesn't trickle down, unfortunately.

It trickles down only if those (executives) in charge of the money choose to let it trickle down.

[midnightpulp]

It trickles down only if those (executives) in charge of the money choose to let it trickle down.

Exactly. As I said, I was once a pure economic Libertarian, but there's too much bullshit in our modern day economic climate that executives/CEOs can pull to impede the so-called "invisible hand of the market" guiding the wealth to its rightful places. That said, I'm okay with tax cuts for your mom and pop burger joints and hardware stores or whatever, but Big Corp can get fucked.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Exactly. As I said, I was once a pure economic Libertarian, but there's too much bullshit in our modern day economic climate that executives/CEOs can pull to impede the so-called "invisible hand of the market" guiding the wealth to its rightful places. That said, I'm okay with tax cuts for your mom and pop burger joints and hardware stores or whatever, but Big Corp can get fucked.

Yes

And ironically most BigCorp executives vote Democrat and claim to lean left of center, mainly because they're just big fat liars and greedy hypocrites that want to keep everyone else down.