Would a 100% tax bracket work to spread the wealth?

How about this: 100% tax on everything below $60,000 and 0% on everything above.

That would get people to work A LOT harder, wouldn't it?

Except for extraordinary circumstances I agree with economist Arthur Laffer that the only two tax rates where you will collect zero taxes are 0% and 100%. Unless you force people to work, no one will earn more than the line where the 100% tax rate starts. The only time I know that it happened was when Churchill placed a 100% corporate tax on businesses during World War II. They accepted it ONLY because the future existence of Britain was at stake.

There was a 95% tax bracket - it was Kennedy that got rid of it.

No obviously a 100% tax bracket would not work - that is why nobody advocates one.

Why do Republicans pretend that progressive taxation is some new invention of Obama's?

Our income tax has always been progressive - since Lincoln introduced it.

McCain is not proposing a flat tax rate.

To some extent, yes - basically, this is setting a maximum salary in the country. (I believe that Jello Biafra used that as one of his proposals when he ran for the Green Party nomination in 2000.) It would reduce the salaries paid to higher-level executives, and either increase it for lower-level workers or reduce prices.

In the long-term, however, you'd see a lot of high-salary people moving out of the country to avoid the taxes. You'd also see a reduction in labor supply, as people would stop working when they hit that threshold.

I'm up for 100% flat tax and I'll trickle it down.