Hardly. It was the core of the tax policy for a very long time.[1]
1: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Historical_Marginal_...
Hardly. It was the core of the tax policy for a very long time.[1]
1: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Historical_Marginal_...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hauser%27s_law#/media/File:U.S...
Total tax revenue in the US is 27% of GDP. In Sweden, it's 46%:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_reven...
That may be true, but since the sources you listed contradict each other, I'm left confused. I can find supporting evidence of the graph[1], but not of the wikipedia entry. The world bank apparently thinks they are all wrong[2]. Then there's a report that Norway is actually doing it with much less taxes than Denmark and Sweden[3], but that might be likely due to oil revenue. I'm left to conlcude that without a lot of research to look into the specifics, there's quite a few ways to measure this, and I'm not sure which are most relevant to the discussion at hand.
1: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/source-revenue-sha...
2: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GC.TAX.TOTL.GD.ZS
3: http://www.thelocal.no/20151204/norway-leading-the-field-for...
But it was, not not too long ago. 35 years ago it was 50%. 40 years ago it was 70%. Just saying it ignores the core of economic and tax policy in the US ignores, well... the the recent history of the economic and tax policy of the US. Rather than a rank dismissal of the idea, why not explain what's so different than now from then that makes it impossible?
> you can't just throw out a link to graph about tax rates 50+ years ago and think that settles it and the US can be just like Norway.
I didn't. I just meant to show that your reason for dismissing it seems poorly founded, or at least poorly explained.
Now it's different. I'll be laughing with my other billionaire buddies about your tax rate plans while snorting coke of a hooker's tits on my private yacht and watching the Monaco F1 GP from the harbor. I've got all the luxuries I need over there, and in fact, everywhere, that I previously could only enjoy in the US. I can talk with who I need to talk to over Skype, I can do my business, banking, everything, remotely.
It's not like other countries don't have equal or better infrastructure. It's not like I can get clean water and food only in the US that would somehow make this a magical place I'd never leave.
So why would I just sit quietly and let you tax me at 90%, exactly?
> So why would I just sit quietly and let you tax me at 90%, exactly?
Extradition treaties and/or freezing of your bank accounts, businesses and resources within the US.
Nobody expects the Spa.. I mean IRS.
That's something you can opt out of. In fact, some do: http://fortune.com/2016/08/11/us-citizens-renounce/