Top income brackets should be taxed at 99%.

[bic_cherry]

Top income brackets should be taxed at 99%.

The following chart shows that in some industries, CEOs earn in excess of 500 times the median employee salary.

This, to curb poverty, society must determine in tandem, BOTH the poverty level for living wages etc as well as the maximum wage possible, in excess of which, taxes of 99% on the tier of excess income is levied.

The competition between countries fighting for talent will NOT then be the top income tax level (it should all be 99%), but the income point where the 50% and 99% income tax bracket begins, e.g. at $5 million and $10 million respectively etc.

Graph source:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/justca...en-it-comes-to-ceo-to-average-worker-pay/amp/

 

[bic_cherry]

Crazy then where is the motivation to work hard and be successful?

Obviously the bracket for 99% will be quite high and only affect the top 0.1% earners.

But when some CEOs currently earn 500 times the salary of the median worker in their companies, there might be corruption involved (e.g. Enron with deliberate accounting errors) which may be moderated somewhat with this limit on wages rule.

And since some CEO earn 500 times the wages of the median worker, even a 50-99% tax at some point will mean that they still easily earn 250 times the salary of the median worker, which is still a very stupendous amount of $$$ don't you think so?

In any case, 99-100% is just a moot point, maybe we can apply something in the region of 70-80% eventually so as not to disincentive hard work. But this shall be the beginning of a debate for more progressive taxation.

Countries whose government impose higher regressive taxes like VAT, GST may be faced with higher societal wealth inequality which will cause social unrest which will also mean falling GDP or high government sovereign debt like Greece etc. Thus, this essay shall inspire greater discussion about more progressive taxation, e.g. Inheritance taxes, property taxes (of up to 60% of annual value at highest bracket) etc so as to fund the general society needs (+ military) and keep society harmonious together (not so much wealth inequality as there is in Singapore and Hong Kong).

 

[bic_cherry]

Even monkeys are smarter than the average Singaporean (worker) as u can see:...



[YouTube]meiU6TxysCg[/YouTube]

 

[bic_cherry]

Reality is it’s impossible to have a universal tax rate for top income earners.

U mean across borders rite, like spear headed by UN across the world?

Guess will depend if people rebel against the greedy CEOs and make it necessary to pass laws to curb such greed. Which wouldn't take too long since people are nowadays uniting to protest in ever bigger numbers, e.g. Hong Kong which has since set a modern day precedence for the commitment and endurance of protesters around the world I think.

Young people are smarter nowadays and able analyse problems better, so they will more quickly accept my views and solution to promote much more progressive income taxation to limit CEO greed and corporate abuse of 'cheap labour', and perhaps shared benifit from automation and artificial intelligence etc.

Is just like anti-global warming efforts. 10 years ago, that was unheard of but today its a common refrain. Likewise the welfare state and universal healthcare, unheard of pre WW2 but common all around Europe thereafter.

 

[bic_cherry]

What would the point be to go to work?

Actually, people will be even MORE MOTIVATED to work to serve the society because trust in society and the government would be much greater.

Such progressive taxation till the top level bracket is 99% will mean that since the really rich pay more in taxes, they would also more sharply scrutinise government activities and expenditure, thus making the bureaucracy leaner and more cost efficient. Because the rich pay PROGRESSIVELY more taxes, many lower income groups will probably pay zero in income taxes since the lower brackets of income will be taxed at very low or zero income taxes (zero to say 3% etc). More work will be available since the greed of the capitalist is moderated and so the implementation of robotics will not be so reckless and unbridled.

The reckless implementation of robotics should be curbed because it can be extremely harmful to the environment since most robot manufacturers today are highly pollutive in their manufacturing processes and there are few efforts at recycling obsolete or discarded robots.

Society will be more cohesive when the workers know that they are not being systematically exploited by capitalist and in so far that the taxation system remains non corrupt, strikes will be few and far between because workers cannot find reason to protest against their capitalist employers when firstly, the impetus to exploit workers is gone and workers cannot find evidence that they are being exploited since there is no motive for capitalist to exploit them in the first place.

Many people will want to work to benifit from the low income taxes available to the average worker so workers are reluctant to go on strike since they know that many other citizens will readily fill in their job vacancies so long as the work contract is fair and judiciously complied with, should they be fired for striking / refusing to report for work during work hours.