I'm of the belief that income is less relevant - wealth is what really matters.

My marginal tax rate is ~48%. I think that's already high enough.

The idea that there is no wealth tax - and that the Fed arguably gives people a negative wealth tax - that seems a little off to me.

The median home owner has about 3:1 leverage on their house - with a home value that's 4x their income. The Fed has been pumping up house prices by a couple percent per year for 13 years.

.02x4x3=.24

The average home owner with a mortgage is getting an ~24% negative income tax. The median tax payer has a ~22% federal tax rate. Effectively, this is a -2% income / wealth tax.

This seems incredibly broken. We've created a society of haves and have nots. People willing to speculate on government handouts on their mortgage are wealthy. People not willing or unable have almost 0 wealth.

I'm in the 1%. Do I deserve to be? I don't know. But by definition, someone does. I make ~4x the median laborer after taxes and transfers. This doesn't seem broken. In my state, I make ~9x minimum wage after taxes and transfers. This also doesn't seem broken. Maybe others think differently?

Before taxes and transfers, the numbers seem much more extreme. That seems irrelevant to me.

The top 1% in wealth have ~100x the wealth of the median person in my state. That seems broken.

I have noticed a pattern: People like to complain about their "marginal tax rate", but rarely share their "effective tax rate". What is your effective tax rate? Unless you are a multi-multi-millionaire or billionaire, only a tiny fraction of your income will be taxed at the maximum marginal tax rate.

My view: If you really believe in reducing income inequality, there is no shortcut. You need to pay. How else can we fix this issue? Beg private corporations to give huge pay rises to medium- and low-skill people? (Don't wait for it!) We need a tax code that forces the 10%/5%/1%/0.1%/0.01%/etc. to pay geometrically increasing effective tax rates. I have never seen an alternative solution that will actually work. Yes, it is painful, but what kind of society and world do we want to create?

They are contributing to decreasing income inequality by describing how they increased their income.

Why should it follow that people who break from a culture of poverty should be forced to support those who do not? It smacks of the “black tax” described in the article - a response that undermines the good that could otherwise follow from greater employment and productivity.