Qasim Rashid, Esq.Apr 26, 2023

A quick history lesson. From 1940-1980:
•Wealthiest paid 70-94% marginal tax
•0 of them went broke from taxation
•0 of them left USA
•All remained exceedingly wealthy
•Manufacturing boomed
•The middle class was 62% of US economy (It's now 40% post 'trickle down scamenomics)
•We had the strongest middle class growth in US History

Let's do that again. Stop protecting billionaires. Start taxing them.
#TaxBillionaires

Show threadAlan Trapulionis

@QasimRashid Is this really accurate? First page of google says ~90% was the highest possible tax rate, but in reality taxes on the wealthy were pretty similar to today

https://taxfoundation.org/taxes-on-the-rich-1950s-not-high/

Taxes on the Rich Were Not That Much Higher in the 1950s

Despite high marginal income tax rates, the top 1% of taxpayers in the 1950s only paid about 42% of their income in taxes. See more about taxes on the rich.

Tax Foundation
Apr 26, 2023 at 5:28pmWeb
Show threadMirageeApr 26, 2023
@alantrapulionis @QasimRashid If what you say is true, why does the Nebraska Billionaire, Warren Buffett, want to be required to pay tax at the same rate as his Secretary. He knows taxes on the wealthy are too low.
Show threadAlan TrapulionisApr 26, 2023
@Miragee @QasimRashid I'm not saying anything lol. The author of this thread states that taxes were 90% on the wealthy for 40 years, and then proceeds to draw conclusions. Would be nice to have some context for this massive claim/history lesson
Show threadErik HaugenApr 26, 2023

@alantrapulionis It's a narrative, of course: "hey income tax is great! look at how wonderful things were in the 50s when we had absurd top rates!"

But reality isn't so simple. I think typical billionaires probably don't and didn't really pay the top rate on a ton of their wealth anyway, so it probably won't matter much if we change it from 37% to 110% in terms of overall revenue.

It's just rhetoric.

Show threadAlan TrapulionisApr 26, 2023
@ech Yeah that's my instinct too. That's why this thread seemed so sus
Show threadErik HaugenApr 26, 2023
@Miragee Not to speak for Buffett, but I think his point was probably that the tax system is too easy to play. Just think how complex it is: there's a lot there that needs to be fixed.
Show threadit's B! Cavello 🐝Apr 27, 2023
@QasimRashid @alantrapulionis this is a cool resource! While I do think that 36 vs 42 is a pretty notable difference (~15%), I also wonder if it could also be quite impactful that the wealthiest people now are just a lot more wealthy, so 42% of today’s top 1% in wealth might yield a lot more $$$ than before.