35

I think taxes should be based on a 5-year rolling average, to ease the burden for people who have high income only once in their life. Winning the lottery or patenting an invention that makes you rich is the American dream. Let's tax high earners but show some lenience for folks who have a once in a lifetime windfall.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] deadbeef79000 5 points 2 days ago

Rich people already pay less tax (through shenanigans). The source of the wealth is irrelevant.

[-] Fallibilist@feddit.uk -3 points 2 days ago

Top 1% in the US pays 40% of all income tax and top 10% pays 70% while the bottom 50% pays 3.3%

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The bottom 50% holds 2.3% of the wealth. So if your 3.3% is correct then that would say they are paying at least 43% to much.

We shouldn't be taxing basic necessities, we should be taxing things that accrue wealth.

If someone owns a shabby house and their income only makes ends meet they should be paying nothing in taxes.

If you want those people to pay more taxes, the wealth needs to be spread to those groups so that wealth can be taxed.

[-] Fallibilist@feddit.uk -4 points 1 day ago

Different argument. The implicit narrative here is that the rich don't pay taxes when in reality they pay almost all the taxes. If you want them to pay even more then that's fair but the reality is that most people don't have the faintest clue what the actual numbers are to begin with.

[-] zout@fedia.io 2 points 1 day ago

It's only a different argument because you want it to be. You're selectively choosing which percentages you want in the argument, and which ones not. I'm not that versed in the different logical fallacies, but I guess this is a straw man fallacy? Atleast, that's one of the strategies I get for this fallacy; oversimplifying an argument, and then attacking this argument.

[-] zout@fedia.io 3 points 2 days ago

How much is that in percentages of their income, disregarding artificially deflated incomes of the rich?

[-] abc@suppo.fi 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Why do you think that matters more than how much they contribute?

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Your question is tied to the idea that their contribution is only contrived of their income taxes, and ignores the fact that 2 people working the same hours contributing the same amount don't receive the same income.

If you want equal contributions from all income taxes them you would have to have equal pay for all jobs.

"But my job contributes more to society". No it doesn't.

The doctor needs a roof just like the roofer needs a colonoscopy.

[-] abc@suppo.fi -4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

“But my job contributes more to society”. No it doesn’t.

It literally, mathematically, does if their wage is higher. Even if there were no tax progression, they pay more taxes, which the society uses.

[-] zout@fedia.io 3 points 1 day ago

Because the bottom 50% couldn't pay 40% of all income tax, they'd have a negative net income. That's why tax brackets exist, once your basic needs are met you can contribute more to society as a whole. It sucks to pay more if you're earning above median, but it's the cost of living in a society.

[-] Lumidaub@feddit.org 3 points 1 day ago

Because if you could contribute more, you should.

this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2026
35 points (76.1% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

9640 readers
37 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.


6. Defend your opinion


This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS