By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - If you represented the wealthy 1% of wage earners in the US

What percentage of your income would you be willing to pay in taxes? That is, at what percentage would you feel you were being overtaxed?

Additionally, if you had the choice would you prefer that a percentages of the taxes you paid went to the source of your choice? (Philanthropic ventures, alternative energy investment, etc.)



Edit your signature or you will be banned. Aww :(

Around the Network

I wouldn't even think about it. I'd have people to do that for me while I'm on vacation in Tahiti.



[2:08:58 am] Moongoddess256: being asian makes you naturally good at ddr
[2:09:22 am] gnizmo: its a weird genetic thing
[2:09:30 am] gnizmo: goes back to hunting giant crabs in feudal Japan

So you'd be okay with 40%? 60%? any other unlikely figure?



Edit your signature or you will be banned. Aww :(

my people can find some loopholes to get it down I'm sure.



[2:08:58 am] Moongoddess256: being asian makes you naturally good at ddr
[2:09:22 am] gnizmo: its a weird genetic thing
[2:09:30 am] gnizmo: goes back to hunting giant crabs in feudal Japan

0%, there should be no such thing as income tax.



Around the Network

I have no idea. I am probably in the bottom 5%. D: I don't like paying taxes at all. :-/



Yeah. I doubt anyone likes paying taxes. I'm all for paying taxes on only what you buy. Acquisitions by the wealthy would naturally account for a much greater percentage of total taxes, while those with less buying power would have less taxes to pay as a result.
Besides, the tax bracket system (unfair in my opinion) would be solved. The percentage would be the same- the volume of taxes would be different.



Edit your signature or you will be banned. Aww :(

There really isn't that much of a difference between having 50 million and 100 mill in the bank so I wouldn't really care.



The thing is, the top 1% wage earners fluctaute every year. There is a steady 0.1% wealthiest people class, but that is very different from top wage earners. If I am a CEO making 1.8 million a year and I work at a company for 17 years, and then get a 75 million dollar bonus+ 200 million in stock options the year I retire because under my leadership the company soared, I would be in the top 1%. For that year.

I think a 25-30% income tax amount is a good amount of taxation for the top 5% bracket.



FaRmLaNd said:
There really isn't that much of a difference between having 50 million and 100 mill in the bank so I wouldn't really care.

 

Oh, but there is. If you had that much money, you would be an idiot to have the money in a bank. The rule of 72 basically says that at 7% interst, your money doubles every 10 years. If you make 50 M a year for 10 years, you will have SIGNIFICANTLY less money than if you make 100 M a year. That extra money gives you more power and control. You can buy an isalnd, own a private jet, have a set of mansions, or start a foundation and support a cause you deeply care about so that you know that you made a large difference in the world, unlike 99.5% of the population. Granted, you could still do those things with the 50 M, but not as well. 50M a year isn't just half of 100M a year, especially when that money is invested and is compounding exponentially.