Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="vantexan" data-source="post: 5751067" data-attributes="member: 24302">Except we&#039;ve already established that you would have people either pay 0% in income tax or 91% of their income in tax, depending on their income.&nbsp; In 1960 the progressive income tax had a top bracket of 91% at $200,000 or higher for singles, $400,000 for couples.That doesn&#039;t mean that they paid 91% of all their income, just 91% above those numbers.&nbsp; Their income below those amounts were taxed at lower rates that grew progressively higher.&nbsp; If you were poor you paid little.But wait there&#039;s more.&nbsp; In today&#039;s dollars it takes more than 10 times more dollars to have the equivalent to those amounts in 1960.&nbsp; So if you thought you were going to take 91% of $200,000+ in income, or $400,000+ depending on if single or a couple, from everyone today making that kind of money you would be wrong.This is all academic anyways.&nbsp; It appears the scourge of America is our school system.I&#039;m Batman.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="vantexan, post: 5751067, member: 24302"] Except we've already established that you would have people either pay 0% in income tax or 91% of their income in tax, depending on their income. In 1960 the progressive income tax had a top bracket of 91% at $200,000 or higher for singles, $400,000 for couples. That doesn't mean that they paid 91% of all their income, just 91% above those numbers. Their income below those amounts were taxed at lower rates that grew progressively higher. If you were poor you paid little. But wait there's more. In today's dollars it takes more than 10 times more dollars to have the equivalent to those amounts in 1960. So if you thought you were going to take 91% of $200,000+ in income, or $400,000+ depending on if single or a couple, from everyone today making that kind of money you would be wrong. This is all academic anyways. It appears the scourge of America is our school system. I'm Batman. [/QUOTE]

Verification