How Trump or Harris tax plans might change your income

IMO, it should incorporate a logarithmic target at homelessness in the entire nation. Those in the top brackets have no right to obscene wealth while anyone is lying in a gutter or going hungry.

The crazy thing is, there would still be obscenely rich people. They just wouldn't be quite as obscenely rich.
- The real key is, they wouldn't miss it at all. Yet they hang on every bit of it.
- Are you asking them to have solid silver statues instead of gold? How dare you \s
I'd argue, since we are an empire and the world's super power both militarily and economically, we shouldn't have any billionaires or even hundred millionaires while people are dying of starvation/malnutrition anywhere in the world.
- I hate to break it to you, but as a resident of the former military and economic superpower, having a super wealthy elite class and a dirt-poor underclass is a feature of being said superpower.
  A well-fed and housed underclass has no need to volunteer for a large enough military force to be present anywhere in the world within, these days, 48 hours.
  And your elite hoarding the wealth in assets they trade and speculate on the stock exchanges gravitates more money into said exchanges from across the world. Without their capital invested in said markets they'd merely be competing with other markets around the world not dominating them.
  My advice, enjoy your empire whilst you still have it and do what you can reasonably do to financially prepare for when it starts to dwindle.

Now factor in the impact of tariff driven inflation on the poor and see if Trump's top numbers are still positive.

Classic conservative playbook. Our country gave "everyone a tax break" which equates to $20 a month on average, then added fees to prescriptions, massively defunded public services and has generally made the economy worse, and thus everything cost more...
Somehow they're still popular. That's how powerful the story of "Conservative good for economy" is. Even even they're actively fucking it up, people still want to vote for them because "they are good for the economy"
- As long as I can remember, Republicans would inevitably crash the economy, Democrats would set it back on a good course (which of course takes a while), and the Republicans would go and crash it again. They got pretty good at timing the crash so it was right as they were leaving power.
  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/02/opinion/sunday/democrats-economy.html#

Trump has a plan?

Concepts of a plan.
- It is a good plan, maybe the best plan that was ever planned.
The heritage foundation has a plan. Why come up with your own when someone has already done the work for you?

Republicans making $35k a year: "but wHeRE is The iNcEnTiVE to bE sUcCeSsFuL????!!!"

They also believe that Jesus might make them rich so best be prepared.

MAGA voters be like: Red scary, ugh.

Honestly they're hoping you only look at the bottom big numbers and ignore your actual insurance bracket.
Still wants to turn the country red.

I assume this isn't including some of the other things in Trump's proposals like getting rid of tax credits for having a child.

Also, what he already did. The home office tax credit was dropped for W2 employees as part of his plan. Wasn't really noticed at the time, but circumstances later on meant that a lot of people could have been taking that credit if someone else was President. Amounts to a few hundred a year--not huge, but not nothing.
IIRC, it automatically goes back to the way it was in a few more years assuming nothing else changes.

Now imagine inflation and the weakening dollar under trumps plan

It's the tariffs I'm worried about.
- But Trump said tariffs don't impact prices and he's a completely rational and trustworthy person who most certainly understands economics!

We need a tax that kicks in when anyone gets a total compensation that is some multiple of the poverty line and some other multiple of the lowest compensation given to anyone working for their company (including subsidiaries, contractors or part time work extrapolated to full time, and not including overtime). The amount should take into account both the lowest pay and the distribution curve of pay, so that the worse the pay inequality is the higher the tax goes.

Suddenly, the only way the executives can actually get the benefit of those bonuses and stocks is if they're raising wages across the board as well.

It's funny because Americans have been radicalized against taxes saying its wage theft and taking away all their earnings..., but historically, when taxes increase, firms have an incentive to pay their workers more so wages generally increase with tax increases. You're pecking at the reason why tit works that way. It's arguably counter intuitive but that's why the propaganda against higher taxes works so well.
- Taxes on wages are theft because you created your labor. Taxes on property and pollution aren't theft because nobody created the earth. The rich have successfully conflated them all as just taxes, and most of us have no idea how tax incidence works.
  You're pecking at the reason why tit works that way.

Wait. Who am I voting for based on this graph if I'm making 200k, and why?

This is purposely not clear.

Don't forget 2016 when Trump said he was going to cut taxes for all Americans and the plan Congress pushed through raised taxes on average by 4000 a year for middle and working class incomes. But the super rich got back millions and millions.
- Yes. I do remember that.
What do you mean this is purposely not clear? Is interpolation so hard for folks?
If you make $200k, you're probably going to land somewhere between the $130k and $330k income levels, meaning your tax savings under Trump's proposed plan will be between $4k and $9k, likely roughly $6.5k. For Harris' proposed plan you'll be between $3k and $2k, likely close to $2.5k.
Yes, the amounts aren't linear, so it's hard to say exactly where you will land, but also these are proposed plans, so they're estimates to begin with. I wouldn't be adjusting my personal budgeting off of a wish list from two people who do not control tax laws.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand from the chart that for most Americans (see, median household income $81k), Harris's tax proposal will net more savings on their annual income, while Trump's plan favors people in higher income brackets.
Trump's plan will increase the national deficit because everyone pays less in taxes. Harris' plan tries to be closer to revenue neutral by putting more of the tax burden on the top 1%.
Who you vote for is your decision, but the fact that we have a populous that can't understand fairly straightforward tables to help inform decision-making is part of the reason why we are so fucked.
- Thank you for the straight answer. I'm financially illiterate.
Then your income will increase by a little over $2000.

Are you perhaps color blind? The shades of red and green were pretty clear for me at a glance.
- I think they might be. blue would've been a better choice. it's weird that people still use red and green when it's the best known and most common form of color blindness and it affects as much as 1 in 20 people, give or take. that's not a small percentage. color blindness in general affects 1 in 12 people.

What a deceptively shitty chart. What the fuck am I looking at?

According to this, those making 100k (33.6% of Americans) will be getting less money. The 66.4% of Americans will be getting significantly more.

Via zippa

As a programmer and my wife is a doctor, I'm in the upper brackets. But I don't care. Also happy to see the millionaires losing even more money!
In my eyes, $3000 goes a long way for someone struggling!
- It's not losing, it's sharing.
- That's because anyone with even a shred of empathy would rather live in a healthy society for relatively cheap.
- Same. Oh no I’ll have to cook at home a few more times per year. How will I survive.
- Yeah, I would pay less under Trump and so would everyone in my area. The brackets that would pay less under Kamala can't afford to live here. Still a very blue area.
- Deleted.

Trump wants me to sell out my country for less than $50k?!? How is that money going to help me when living in the country becomes unbearable and my dollar is worth a fraction of what it does today?

EDIT: The problem is the suburban $139k bracket, living paycheck to paycheck and in debt up to their eyeballs. That $1000 difference might look real juicy to those guys.

How the fuck do you manage to spend 139k a year? People don't make any god damn sense.
- Oh man, it happens without you knowing it. I got caught in that once. Between my wife and I we were making close to $200k and we couldn't survive two months without a paycheck. Mortgage, car payments, school loans, credit cards payments and taxes for start. Then you want to make yourself feel better because your job and traffic to and from work are sucking the life right out of you, so you start buying shit and decorating so you can have a sanctuary, all the while you are strengthening the chains around your neck.
  A slave with a nice car and house is still a slave. They just are less aware of it...until they want to quit and realize that they can't.

The ones that make 14 million or more would have AT LEAST $544,135 to waste on Trump propaganda (comes from 376,910 + 167,225)

Times 4 years
- Times so much more :P

Now compare that with the inflation their economic plans will cause. 100 or 1000% tarrifs will turn most of Trump's greens to red real quick

I thought the top 0.1% was more like $3 million. Either way it's still an incredibly large amount of money for 1 in 1000 people to be making. With 131 million households that's 131000 households making more than $14 million per year which is WILD. One in a thousand isn't that uncommon, yet I'd never guess who were making that kind of money. They must just be living in completely separate spaces.

I think nearly 10% of the US population is millionaires (by wealth, not income) and the percentage is even more if you take home equity into account.
Say what you will about the country, but there isn't a prosperity problem, only a rampant inequality problem.
- Millionare in assets is vastly different than $1 million per year in income. It's pretty much a requirement to have $1 million in assets to be able to retire lately and assuming years of compounding growth in the market this is pretty easily attainable by retirement for most (I know this is a big assumption but our whole economy is built on it).

Wtf? Why am I benefiting most under Harris? Shouldn't that be the guys on the very bottom?

I mean, I'll take it, but...weird?

(also fuck Trump, he can eat dirty diapers)

If the ultra rich pay a fair percentage, the tax burden falls for the rest of everyone.
Wherever each candidate’s darkest green category lies is where the concentration of power that keeps them supported resides.
It was a struggle between the middle class and the upper class. The upper class, once again, tricked the lower class into supporting them. The middle class has lost, and now its power will be dismantled as much as possible. The lower class, as usual, will not benefit much from either scenario. This is why their vote was easy to sway. They really didn’t have a horse in the race, but now the gap widens. I hate typing this out and it makes me feel gross, but this is what’s happening.

Oh boy 2000 extra dollars. That'll really turn things around for me...

That's a month and a half of rent. You know what I would give to be a month and a half ahead on rent right now??
- I mean it'd help a little but I doubt it would be life changing. It certainly won't push the needle from struggling to living comfortably for me. Meanwhile the top 1% get their taxes raised by .01%. Woohoo.
- No, it's two good dinners a month, or 1/10th your rent per month, doled out statistically bi monthly.

Changing taxes levied on income doesn't change the income itself. Do they mean remaining income after tax?

Are you guys taxed at the source or where does this confusion come from?

tax/eat the rich B)