News Focus
News Focus
icon url

woofer

02/01/10 11:05 PM

#91248 RE: woofer #91215

I should clarify- I used the 2009 Tax Rate Schedule X for a single filer...
http://taxes.about.com/od/2009taxes/qt/2009_tax_rates.htm
And obviously, I didn't take capital gains tax into consideration because I don't know what the rich got away with last year, so the money in the kitty would actually be a lot larger than the total I posted.
Plus, that was only for the top 0.1% (top 1/10 of 1 percent). Imagine how much it would help if others at the top were contributing more. 90% seems a little high, even to me, but if it was only for a year or two, it sure would make a big difference over all.
icon url

n4807g

02/02/10 7:55 AM

#91263 RE: woofer #91215

Hey you got right into it. ;)

It's a good start. After crunching the numbers you came up with an additional tax paid of $154 billion. That's a very substantial increase in tax revenue and would go a long way in partially solving the chronic deficit problem, but more is needed. You could expand into the top 10% and increase the additional tax revenue but I believe you would quickly see diminishing returns.

Good start........