90% tax bracket. If someone making $10 mil ayear was upset about paying $9 mil in taxes would he be greedy?

No, it's not greedy,simply unjust to take the fair return on someone's investment of his capital, effort, and time.

The amount is irrelevant.

Tax rates were at 90% for the highest income earners during and just after WWII.

Some of them paid as a patriotic duty but the majority quickly slowed down their earnings or took their enterprises overseas once it was safe again.

Why should they risk their capital or work hard for such a small return?

There is NOTHING to stop the Democratic Triumvirate of Reid, Pelosi, and Obama from RAISING taxes and rates to ANYTHING they WANT.

It's been a LONG TIME since the tax rate was that progressive.

But now - the top tax rate is too low and the 3% can be put back

Years Lowest Rate Highest Rate Source

1944-1945 - 23% 94% Census

1946-1947 - 19% 86.45% Census

1948-1949 - 16.6% 82.13% Census

1950 - 17.4% 84.36% Census

1951 - 20.4% 91% Census

1952-1953 - 22.2% 92% Census

1954-1963 - 20% 91% Census

1964 - 16% 77% Census

1965-1967 - 14% 70% Census

1968 - 14% 75.25% Census

1969 - 14% 77% Census

1970 - 14% 71.75% Census

1971-1981 15 brackets 14% 70% IRS

1982-1986 12 brackets 12% 50% IRS

1987 5 brackets 11% 38.5% IRS

1988-1990 3 brackets 15% 33% IRS

1991-1992 3 brackets 15% 31% IRS

1993-2000 5 brackets 15% 39.6% IRS

2001 5 brackets 15% 39.1% IRS

2002 6 brackets 10% 38.6% IRS

2003-2008 6 brackets 10% 35% IRS

There is no such thing. Even marginal tax brackets round off at about 35% for the highest wage earners for federal taxes. Which, added into your state/city taxes, would place you near 50% total taxes. No such thing.

You don't realize that you are talking about 90% on just part of a rich person's income, not the whole thing. For example, though I don't know the exact numbers, if you make 300,000, you may have only been charged that 90% on 25,000 of that money, not the whole lump sum. And that was only for like 2-3 years in the fifties. You don't know what you are talking about.

So he is paying 3.5 mil and the other guy is paying less then $5,000. You don't know how the system works. The millionaire pays 33% on almost all his income. The guy making $50,000 is not even paying 33% on any of his income. Stop quoting Left wing bumper sticker slogans.

America is capitalist. People can be poor and homeless living in a dumpy old city and become a millionaire if they have enough motive. Everyone has equal opportunity with the school system in America, that's why we live in the greatest country in the world. Increasing taxes ruins the American dream and at the stage of our economy, it can cause serious problems. Herbert Hoover did it in 1929 which led to the great depression, we can't afford that.

McCain/Palin 08'

You idiot, we have a MARGINAL tax system. So, he would only be taxed 8.5 million! HAHAHA...marginal tax system is LIKE this:

1-20,000 10%

20,0001-40,000 20%

40,001-60,000 30%

just an example

so, if you made 60,000, your first 20,000 is taxed 10%, your next 20,000 is taxed 20%, the final 20,000 is taxed 30% so your total tax burden would be 23.333% Not 30, which is the MARGINAL tax rate.

learn some econ if you want to talk some econ.

There would be no incentive to work if the government is going to tax 90% of it. I know you wouldn't work either for that kind of a tax base.

So the question becomes mute.

Lol... wtf..

Wow, I don't think this even happens in the most socialist regimes, where you have to pay over 60%...

People making $10,000,000.00 a year should at least pay 40%... That's my way of looking at it.

But 90% is just retarded... I don't know of any retarded country with this tax bracket...

I'm sure when you play Monopoly and the person who is winning get a card from the community chest that says $40 per house, $115 per hotel you tell them not to pay it because is not fair for you to win.

Someone making 10 million a year won't be taxed 9 million.