You analysis of “well if you take more people will have to work harder to make more” is something I can only imagine in bizzaro land. It may sound good on paper but its not how the real world works.

Except if you study economics — real world economics — you find that people will in fact bust their asses even when they’re being taxed at extraordinary rates. Indeed, during one of the highest growth periods of the US economy, taxes on the richest elites were way above 80%. Just look at the rates for the late 1940s. The whole time the highest tax rate is in the 90s!!! You need to study this stuff before you go spouting off about it, Brian. Or, if you don’t understand something, don’t just go making something up and assuming you’re right and the other guy is from “bizarro land” or whatever.

But all of this is beside the point. Another economic truism is that people will bust their asses for $100,000/year, let alone $250,000 a year. I was actually kind of kidding about people working harder for marginal returns at high incomes. There’s no economic theory I’m aware of under which people get paid $250,000 a year to make them work harder. Markets don’t work that way. There would be no reason for it. That kind of money is NOT given out because the recipient requires it to work hard. Salaries at that level are the result of the recipient having special leverage in the market, for a host of reasons, including the monopolization of specialized knowledge, special connections or conditions, etc. But few people suggest that, in any except the rarest jobs, extraordinarily high salaries are to induce harder work, longer hours, etc.

But maybe that’s not the angle you’re looking at this from. Maybe you just think people deserve more money than $250,000/year, for whatever reasons. But our society would do just fine if no one made more than that, even under capitalism. People who are more humble, more grateful and every bit as capable will gladly do for $80,000 a year what your theoretical whiners will, theoretically, not do for $250,000/year. Hell, even if it took 3 workers at 80k, it would make sense! Problem solved. Crybabies lose out.

Only people with the luxury of having the alternative of liesure would turn down that kind of money. And we can easily do without such folks. They’d be replaced without ever being missed, and the gears of industry would continue to churn.

The other thing to keep in mind is that tax rates can be applied only on particular portions of taxable income. So the $250k+ rate can be charged only on the “earnings” above $250k. In fact, that’s exactly what the current highest bracket is supposed to do. So there would be ZERO disincentive against hard work, if in fact that kind of money was supposed to be an incentive for hard work. In real life, people get paid massive sums because of market forces having nothing only marginally to do with the quality of their work or the amount of effort they expend. In a system with extreme tax rates, that would not change at all. Generally, owners would have to take a little bit less in order to provide extraordinary salaries. The world keeps turning…

JFK was no JFK, so I hope Obama is no JFK either He’s going to be another ruling class president who, like JFK and Clinton, doesn’t rock the boat too much. One would hope he’d be more like Nixon when it comes to economics, but we should be so lucky. In any case, we’re going to get ruling class attitudes and nothing that significantly ricks the boat. And besides, it’s too much to ask of a president, anyway. If the country really wanted to get off oil in 8 years, we could probably get very far toward that goal. More easily than if we wait for some authoritarian to do it from on high.

THEY could’ve had a 100mpg car years ago if they weren’t in cahoots with the oil industry…so now, we’ll soon be back to the horse & buggy

It also stands to reason that the nation will take pause before going into war.

*got that from liberal talker Sam Seder

For example, if taxes are going to be higher for people making $250K or more then they will be a point that it doesn’t make sense to make over a certain amount.

Let’s say I make $300K and have to pay $60K to the federal government. In effect I’m only “making” $240K so why bother with the extra effort it takes to make $300K if the government is going to take more?

You analysis of “well if you take more people will have to work harder to make more” is something I can only imagine in bizzaro land. It may sound good on paper but its not how the real world works. Nobody is going to bust their ass if they only get to keep 20%.

You are right about the “public good” thing. I was talking more about giving to charities, etc. not building my own roads. I expect the government to build roads out of what I pay already. It is sort of a priority. Nevertheless, if the government didn’t want to build roads I could always buy an off road vehicle.

As far as people who pay a lot of taxes always complaining about taxes and being “whinners”, well all I have to say is that you probably don’t pay a lot of taxes. It is not fun to watch your hard earned money wasted, or used to buy votes, etc. I’m not one who thinks that the people in DC have our best interest in mind — they have their best interest in mind.