Hacker News Reader

Comment by PsySecGroup | Hacker News Reader

Curious timing given the expansion of the IRS.

EDIT: why is this getting down voted?

If I were wealthy enough to be /actually/ affected by the IRS expansion (400k+/yr) it would be a wise investment to spread articles like this to make sure The People are as against the IRS expansion as possible.

I'm curious what the avg income level of your downvoters is... ;-)

A 2022 $400K/year threshold hits population A.

With inflation, The 2023 population A is much larger. The idea of $400K/year being slated as a "minority of easy-to-dismissed wealthy" will be an important frame to keep alive as population A keeps growing due to inflation.

I’d happily pay more taxes if I could wake up tomorrow making $400k/year in 2023 dollars.

If want tommorrow's money to pay today's prices, start managing wealth.

You'll end up getting tommorrow's money to paid for tommorrow's prices, however. And I'm pretty sure you won't like that. You never have, in fact.

I make more than $400k, and my tax bill is criminally low.

$400k is a 98% percentile income in San Francisco metro, DC metro, and NYC metro.

Sure, inflation may increase the number of households earning $400k, but it's still a tiny minority of the population and will be for a long time.

> $400k is a 98% percentile income in San Francisco metro, DC metro, and NYC metro.

You care about household income, not individual.

https://dqydj.com/income-by-city/ gives 95th, not 98th in SF Metro area for household income. 92nd in Silicon valley.

Ok, but that doesn’t change the main point - that’s still a small fraction of the total population.

Population A is a miniscule fraction of today's earners. Even if it doubles 3 times, it will still be a small percentage. We have a long, long runway until we need to figure out of $400k is too big of a population.

This comment is likely being down voted because it provides zero analysis or factual content while appearing to be an attempt to stir the partisan pot.

Please name a single non-partisan, wholly independent, politically agnostic, scientifically distilled objective tax that emerged external of any political pressures whatsoever.

The expansion to the IRS will directly alleviate the injustice implied by the headline. But your headline focused on the problem, not the solution which is already underway, so it just seems like misinformation and outrage bait.

Why do you think adding more agents means they will target the poor less?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com