What should the federal income tax be in America for the highest tax bracket?

Title. You can also post what you think the other tax brackets should be.

 

I voted 0%. Any tax on a man's wealth and/or labor is immoral.

 

You really put the "volunteer" in "all volunteer military", huh
Bring your own gun.....

I voted 70%, that's what the rate was during the time of the greatest economic growth, and while the concentration of wealth declined.
There are reasons to believe that 70% is the best rate for economic growth.

 

Eliminate it entirely, and the central bank too. These things never, ever should have been instituted in the first place.

 

I voted 0% because I think there shouldn't be one. I support a National Consumption Tax.

 

You should have voted 'Fair Tax' which is equivalent to a national consumption tax.

 

There's no reason to indicate that a 70% tax rate is conducive for economic growth.

 

While I would prefer a 10-15% flat tax, I think a 25% flat tax is reasonable, and when dependent deductions are factored in for lower incomes it actually becomes a 'progressive scale.' Thus, it can mediate between both sides of the political spectrum, the 70%ers and the 0%ers.

 

I say 10% across the board on every penny that anyone takes in. No brackets, exemptions or credits. This would actually bring in more revenue than we do now and would greatly simplify the tax code.

 

I checked 25% flat tax although I would actually like to see a 15% flat tax on everyone no matter how rich or poor. Everyone needs to have a turtle in the race.

 

Actually there is, and not only the empirical experience.
There is the law of marginal utility.
The place where taxes have the least negative effect is when they are levied on the very wealthy, in fact you could argue the net effect is positive.
If we consider the case of those wealthy enough to have no unmet needs, then their marginal income will go directly to investment.
Lowering their taxes, increases the amount of money available for investment, but it also increases the deficit, and the exact same amount is borrowed from capital markets, yielding a net zero change in the amount available for private investment.
Raise taxes on this group, and the effect on the economy is positive, the additional tax lowers the deficit, which reduces the amount borrowed from capital markets, freeing up enough money for private investment to exactly balance out the reduction in investment due to higher taxes.
The difference is a lower debt level. Which has a net positive effect on the economy.

 

Absolutely! They have created more harm than imaginable to the idea of a republic.

 

Everyone should pay a 25% income tax collected at the point of purchase, at the cash register for example. Even people on welfare and entitlements, subsidies, etc. should pay the 25%. For example, when Shaniqua uses her welfare card to buy booze, drugs, restaurant meals and Escalades, she should also pay the tax.

The flat 25% combined tax limit would cover all taxes including state, local, gasoline, school and all other hidden taxes. Twenty-five percent would be the maximum that anyone would pay.

If federal, state and local governments can't make it on that, then that's just tough tacos!

 

I personally believe that a statement in the Jewish Bible indicates that a 9.5% tax rate by government would initiate many aspects of what is termed the era of Messiah/Moshiach....and even the Mahdi!!! About half of people in North America do not pay any income tax....so in some ways our taxation is the most just that any nation has ever had.

Joseph while he ran Egypt took twenty percent of the grain crop......he knew that a time of trouble was coming.......To tax the wealthy in the USA less than twenty percent could lead to a lot of civil unrest which could cause more harm than good????!!!



And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.
Tools specific to 1Samuel 8:15
1Sa 8:15
And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.

And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.

He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.


And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day."

God seemed to be saying that for all that the king would actually accomplish.....for him to take ten percent.....would be kind of like theft.........A 9.5% would initiate some aspects of the era of Messiah............The initiation of the era of Messiah would include taking the heart of rich people and inspiring them to not be so selfish.....They were obviously intelligent....that is why they became rich.....so if God took hold of their motivations....it is amazing what they could accomplish.......

President Lincoln saved American taxpayers FOUR BILLION DOLLARS IN INTEREST PAYMENTS....which has huge implications for how our economy could be different than it is!!!!


http://www.michaeljournal.org/lincolnkennedy.htm

"In 1972, the United States Treasury Department was asked to compute the amount of interest that would have been paid if that 400 million dollars would have been borrowed at interest instead of being issued by Abraham Lincoln. They did some computations, and a few weeks later, the United States Treasury Department said the United States Government saved 4 billion dollars in interest because Lincoln had created his own money. So you can about imagine how much the Government has paid and how much we owe solely on the basis of interest."

 

That any man should be excused from the cost of maintaining the environment and infrastructure while benefitting disproportionately from his use of it is immoral.

 

Granny says a 50% alternative minimum tax...

... on incomes over a million dollars...

... oughta `bout do the trick...

... an' help reduce the deficit...

... an' so's she can get her 2nd stimulus check.

 

Feel free to continue thinking that, you'll find no agreement here.

I'm perfectly willing to give up my ability to use roads.

As for the environment, that's not owned by the state. If you wish to maintain it, feel free to - but I am under no obligation to.

 

Rich people's politicians write the laws on taxes and they will always favor the rich so throwing an arbitrary number out there is totally useless.

Fair taxes are anything but fair.

Flat taxes will only work if all other forms of taxation are eliminated, which should be done already. If there is going to be an income tax it should be 16% across the board for any earnings. 10% going to the state, and 6% going to the feds. This asinine BS of the feds getting it all and using it as bribery to be distributed as crooked/criminal politicians see fit is what is wrong with our system today. These corporate sock puppets are the people's government not the government of the highest bidders.

If there is going to be no income tax then just stop pretending that this is a nation by the people for the people built on laws, and call it the monarchy (AKA plutocracy) it is.

 

This is largely because you apparently operate under the superstitious belief that you are a self-made man.

You really can not do that without also giving up your ability to make taxable income in the first place.

No, of course not. It is, however, administered by the state, supposedly for the common good.

This is an absurd position. We all have a need to maintain it, as a matter of survival of our species. No, you are not free to slough off that obligation. You use it or contribute to its degradation just by being alive. Come back here and pick up the burden you just tried to dump on the rest of us.

 

90%, just like it was when that flaming socialist Eisenhower was President.

http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html

 

Would you care to show me exactly where in the Constitution, is the general government given authority over the environment, and where exactly, it can tax the citizens to pay for the upkeep on the said environment?

 

Of course not, I've got help from loads along the way, and we've voluntarily negotiated what their contribution is worth. My employer provides the capital, and so gets a share. My colleagues have shared my labor, so they get a share. Et cetera.

If you're talking about schooling I went to private, albeit partially state funded schools. That was my parents' action not mine, I wasn't old enough to purchase the schooling myself, obviously. If a condition of yours is that I don't use any publicly funded school or alternatively pitch in whatever the public cost involved is, I'd be happy with that. I'd imagine that would be the school's decision not the government's - at least where I live.

So you'll be fine with me making that informed choice for myself, as a liberal, of course.

The state's administration of the environment is illegitimate. If it wants to exclude me use of it, then they should start using it themselves - then they can claim exclusive use or "public" use.

I'll take that risk, thanks. Dire consequences (far less dire than you hint) are not a valid justification for the use of force, in my view.

You're welcome, of course, to stop me doing this. But don't think yourself any better than the thief.

It's unowned - I am wronging no-one. The environment has no inherent right to continue except that which is found in the individual.

Additionally, maintenance of "public" environment costs a trivial amount of money. There are far better ways of coming up with this money than creating the illusion that you're doing something, while in reality doing far less than is needed to satisfy the values of most people.

 

not according to Jesus

 

What Jesus demands, or expects, is for the Kingdom ( the Church ) which has nothing to do with what the Constitution demands or expects ( I know, an impossibility ) or what it authorizes.

Anyone that feels comfortable giving all of their income and wealth to a bunch of men/women to waste as is done in Foggy Bottom, feel free to knock yourself out. You do not, however, have a right to demand I do the same.

 

I chose 0%. We should abolish the IRS, repeal the 16th Amendment and embrace freedom from economic slavery once again. Ceasing outrageous expenditures and collecting tax on imports should be able to sustain a United States Proper (which has a much smaller Federal Government). Before we reach that point, we could do away with the income tax and institute a consumption tax + import/export tax. That should certainly stimulate the economy. Once we're looking at balanced budgets again, we could reconsider the consumption & export taxes. Once our economy is flourishing again, people will want to import much more here, because our dollar would be worth that much more and we'd have a growing market once again. Thus, the taxes imposed on imported products would be considerably more.