• workerONE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Edit: I didn’t realize it said you would be taxed 70% on income above 10 million, I was thinking it was 70% of 10 million. Yeah 10 million (or 6.5 after normal taxes) in one year is plenty.

    I think America is fueled by the dream of “making it big”. I believe we should all have that opportunity and so I think these income taxes should take effect on the second year that your income exceeds the threshold, but that you should pay a lower rate for the first year. People invent things, they write stories, make movies, win at gambling… Those people should be allowed to enjoy their success, not be punished because their payout came all in the same year.

    • iAvicenna@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      That is why they should teach everyone basic statistics and probability and give them the data and explain to them how much worse life is on average in the “making it big” setting vs a more equal distribution of resources. Sure maybe without the drive to be a world dominating online shopping platform, we wont have a service like Amazon but Amazon is not a necessity it is just a habit which one can live without easily. I would take cheap and good quality housing vs amazon any day. And also with people having more time to spend in their hobbies, I am sure there will be a lot of open source innovations which will be just as useful as amazon.

      • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        90% of the things everyone insists is only possible under individualistic capitalism suck balls anyways, domestic services here in sweden are significantly less shit than amazon.

        yeah i can’t buy a neon green spandex flamingo but why the fuck would i? and i can instead have something actually useful delivered within 3 days usually, at a fair price, without warehouse personnel being forced to piss in bottles.

    • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah for some poor sod who wins the lottery, publishes his banger novel and gets his oscar worthy multi million dollar movie into cinema and therefore gets an income above 10 million $ that year, I don’t think he will be signficantly hurt paying 70 % tax on everything above those 10 million $.

    • vaknin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      3 million (i.e. 30% of 10m) per year is enough, in my opinion.
      Also, don’t forget the fact that it takes time to be successful, so they’ll inevitably pass through the lower tax brackets first, and “earn their bread”.

      • kcfb@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        6 months ago

        That isn’t how tax brackets work. In the scenario outlined here individuals would pay 70% tax on everything they earn over 10 million. Which even further reinforces your point, as this is an enormous amount of compensation for anyone in a single year.