Sums it Up Perfectly

submitted by Orangutan from i.redd.it

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]alkhd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Change the numerator to 0.9 if you'd like. Also, the function can never return 100% for any real number.

It's still beyond retarded.

Also, the function can never return 100% for any real number.

Yeah sure if you don't consider a 99.999998477% tax for someone earning 1 million to be 100%, well I guess they still technically earn a cent so it's not so bad.

I thought it was a pretty good answer.

Seriously? You would have people all over the world laughing at how ridiculous you are if you were in a position to suggest this tax rate. You said that this is better than any income tax solution ever passed by Congress...???

[–]C3P0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You're missing the big idea, which is that particular function is not the best function. The point is that there exists some function which is better than discrete tax brackets.

[–]alkhd 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

yes and you are missing the point that you don't need a complex function because you can just use tax brackets and then anyone no matter their mathematical background can easily increase or decrease tax for a given group and anyone no matter their mathematical background can understand what you are doing when you tweak the numbers.

[–]C3P0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Point taken.