"John H." wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:54:35 -0000, Tim wrote:

On Nov 11, 11:26 am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"HK" wrote in message

. ..





wrote:

You want to reform the tax codes? Exempt the poor, however that is
defined, and then tax *all* income from, say, $50,000 to $100,000 at
10%,
all income above that to $250,000 at 15%, all income above that to
$500,000 at 20%, all income above that to $1,000,000 at 25%, and any
income above $1,000,000 at 49%.

No deductions. No shifting of money coming in to other categories so
it
isn't considered income.

Oh, and supervised bookkeeping for corporations. No funny business
with
the books. And income tax on corporate profits, too.

Every entity pays.

Churches, too.

Not bad. I'd probably support that.

I have a general question though. Why the stepped increases for higher
incomes?
The person/family making 100k in your plan pays 10k in taxes. A
person/family making 250k pays over three times the taxes (32.5k) but
only
earned 2.5 times as much. Just curious as to your reasoning.

Eisboch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Richard, I'd say it's probably like having a boat with 4 300 hp.
outboards, fuel consumption at half throttle is a set standard, and
full throttle, consumption is well over double that standard.

go figure.

My wife got a raise which i thought was substantial, now she takes
home less than she did, because she's now in a higher bracket.
go figure.



Something doesn't compute. Even though a raise in salary can put you in a
higher tax bracket I just can't think of how your net, after tax income can
be lower than before the salary increase.

The tax rate for the new bracket would have to be 100%.




I look at it like this, the more you make the higher percentage you
are taxed, which I think gives less of an incintive to suceed. What's
the point of working harder if you are going to enjoy less of the
financial benefits.


The French finally figured that out.