Me going to school for free, me going to the doc for free
"That is not free that you pay for it by your taxes"
Ok, me paying taxes for the same benefits that I had. Effectively paying back my debt. The debt doesn't control my life because if I lose my job, I don't have to pay my debt through taxes, if I change careers, I still pay what I can.
"That is communism!!! That is bad"
Elsewhere, the same service for the same cost
Person goes into debt to go to school, person goes into debt to go to doc
"That is good! Taking accountability"
Same person pay extra through interest rates.
"Usa! Usa! Usa! Low taxes! Small government! Freedom from government!!!"
Person is slaving away at their job because they can't afford losing their job and missing a pay check.
As opposed to the 55 they pay for the same "socialist" services at a worse quality of the services rendered?
Might be the best in the world for the folks who can afford world class service, but the US medical system costs the US taxpayer far more than their counterparts even in a "socialist" 45% top bracket tax country, for a far lower quality of service rendered.
Way it ought to be,
Separate incomes out by the percentile,
Assign the bracket boundaries at the thresholds of the 20th percentile, 40th percentile, 60th percentile, 80th percentile, 95th percentile, and 99th percentile.
Incomes in the 0-20 bracket are untaxed,
Incomes in the 20-40 bracket are taxed at a rate equal to the share of national wealth controlled by households who top out in this bracket,
Incomes in the 40-60 bracket are taxed at a rate equal to the share of national wealth controlled by households who top out in this bracket,
Incomes in the 60-80 bracket are taxed at a rate equal to the share of national wealth controlled by households who top out in this bracket,
Incomes in the 80-95 bracket are taxed at a rate equal to twice the share of national wealth controlled by households who top out in this bracket,
Incomes in the 85-99 bracket are taxed at a rate equal to twice the share of national wealth controlled by households who top out in this bracket,
Incomes in the 99+ bracket are taxed at a rate equal to three times the share of national wealth controlled by households (just for some perspective, this would top out at 91.8% with 30.6% of the national wealth controlled by the 1%) who top out in this bracket, individuals in a household that top out in this bracket are also barred from elected, hired, or appointed public office for ten years after the last time they top in this bracket.
Also, for every 20th multiple of the median income in the 0-20 bracket you cross over, you pay an additional 4% increase to your nominal tax rate
Also also, loans collateralized on capital assets (except for a primary residence mortgage or primary vehicle car loan) are considered salary income for tax purposes.
And had the poster used a picture of an actual communist outside the US. That would be worth considering. But we should ask, why did they choose a non communist US congress person? Op's message might be stupid but as scary as it sounds. They put actual thought into it and chose the picture on purpose.
When Reagan was in office I think it was 95% for income over $1,000,000. He claimed that if he was getting taxed 95% for making a movie, he wouldn't make a movie, and everyone else involved would be out of work. Because sure, they're not going to just hire another actor instead... Unfortunately idiots believed him.
Sounds more likely that actors wouldn't demand to be paid more than 1,000,000 (which is still an absurdly high amount), so they would be cheaper to hire and perhaps they would star in more films to compensate (even though, again, 1,000,000 is already an absurd amount) (i briefly forgot how taxes work)
Plus the ever popular tactic of using the fact people don't understand marginal rates against them. It's not a case of if you get over $1M you lose 95% of it, you lose 95% of amounts in EXCESS of $1M...
If the government was taking 45% of anyone's money, there would be no deficit, Social Security would be solvent in perpetuity, and we'd easily be able to provide universal healthcare. Instead, not a single god damn person pays anywhere close to 45% of their money in taxes
Actually the UK's Higher Tax Rate is 40% for income above £50k, but when you add in National Insurance tax the total rate of tax is 42% (with 28% for earnings between £12k and £50k).
For incomes over £125k under the Additional Tax Rate it's 45% (47% with National Insurance. So a significant number of high income workers do get taxed 45% or above, at least for a portion of their salaried/wage income.
The kicker is that the wealthy don't earn most of their money working for an income, they do it through investments, which is covered under capital gains tax. Income tax starts at 20% and goes up with income, meanwhile capital gains tax starts at 20% and goes down through loopholes.
The issue isn't income tax, that's just making the plebs fight against one another. The issue is capital gains tax and all the loopholes the ultra wealthy use to avoid paying their share. These people don't contribute to society, they don't work, they just make money off of their money and other peoples' work.
45% overall would be far higher than 125k. You would have 20% tax up to £50k, 40% tax between £50k and £125k, and then 45% tax above £125k. So in order to be taxed 45% overall you would have to earn well over £125k, as a significant portion of your earnings would still be taxed at the lower rates. You don't start paying the higher rate until you're earning it, and even then you pay the lower rate for any earnings below the threshold.
The UK tax system also has a werid position between about £100k and £125k. There is a tax free allowance between 0 and around £12.5k, when you earn over £100k this starts to reduce until £125k where it is entirely removed. After £125k you start making money again, but with earnings of between £100k and £125k per year you can actually take home less.
There is specific maths that clear this up more consisely (not least because thresholds change every year) but that's the general gist of it.
I think you're missing what an "effective tax rate" is. If your country's income tax is 0% on the first 10k, 10% on the next 10k, and 20% after that and you earn 40k, your effective tax rate is:
Take a look at the guy's post history. He posts repeatedly from fascist adjacent news sources how Milie in Argentina is a chad anarco-capitalist and not a fascist. Which is pretty much the same thing. It's laughable.
