• FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 days ago

    How would an infinitely adjusting tax percentage be intuitive? Brackets are simple. You pay x% on your income in some bracket and y% on your income in a different bracket. You only need simple multiplication and addition to figure out what you would owe.

    • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      A continuous bracket could be defined by a single equation. You’d plug in your income and you’d get out your taxation. No need to look up what bracket you are in.

        • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          For example, a sigmoid function (click link for equation). You’d need to mess with the constants to align the function with a range of incomes but the general shape will be the same - a low, almost-zero taxation rate for those who earn the least, rising to a threshold (perhaps even 100%, but a lower value like 75% would probably work as well), giving a high taxation to those who earn the most.

          • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            18 days ago

            You think the general population is going to have an easier time understanding the sigmoid function that some simple multiplication and addition?

      • Reyali@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        If you expect the average person to be able to understand an algebraic equation better than the existing system, then I’d suggest you get out of your social bubble and meet more ‘average’ people.