Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Lawrence who wrote (314544)	11/5/2002 11:49:14 AM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

You want the government to decide how much everybody earns You must make a special effort to misunderstand so badly. higher earners are taxed to the point where their net earnings equal those of lower wager earners That is not necessarliy the case, and I don't think that is a desirable case. What you are describing is some sort of income ceiling, not a progressive tax rate. Reagan used to misrepresent taxes a lot by using the incremental change in rates from one bracket to another. The taxes were determined as step functions (this means that at some exact dollar amount the tax rate changed suddenly from one percentage to another,for example the first$1- $100 might be taxed at 10% while $101-$100000 might be taxes at 11%). Reagan would make a big deal out of these boundaries. If you made it to high school math you might know that the rate of change at a discontinuous step function is essentially infinite. The particular dollar which brought a taxpayer from $100 to $101 (in my example) would appear to have an effective tax rate that was exhorbitant. It was really a mathmatical fiction, the top rate is never higher than the highest actual rate. These days we have calculators and Turbo Tax and it would be easy to use a formula that avoided step functions. everybody get's the same benefit out of the system irrespective of how much they put into it. Even that is not Communism. It seems like the slogan was "To each according to their needs". That has nothing to do with tax rates either, but it does show that you have a serious misunderstanding about political and economic theory and systems. TP