Goldberg criticized Ocasio-Cortez for overlooking the achievements of her peers.
But PAYGO passed overwhelmingly and the Democratic leadership successfully undermined Ocasio-Cortez's bid for a radical Green New Deal congressional committee by creating a more moderate - and surely less effective - one in its place. There is no bill, and even if there was one featuring a 70% tax rate on the rich, it is hard to imagine it passing into law.
Stein quotes Mark Mazur, former assistant secretary for tax policy in the Treasury Department as observing, "You'd certainly see some people under that system change their behavior to avoid the higher rate, which could significantly impact how much revenue it generates". You know, I mean, my femur was shattered.
Ocasio-Cortez suggests that any taxpayer that makes more than $10 million a year, or roughly about 16,000 Americans, would be taxed at 70 percent, almost doubling the current tax rate for this bracket of earners. "That doesn't mean all 10 million dollars are taxed at an extremely high rate, but it means that as you climb up this ladder you should be contributing more". But twitterians have already reacted to her words. Again, there is no real plan. Many of them praised the Democratic congresswoman's response. What is scandalous is increasing income taxes to 70%. So if Ocasio-Cortez is losing these key battles, why does she keep dominating every news cycle? Data cited by the Washington Post indicates that as of 2016, only 16,000 tax filers - or 0.5% of USA households - had income over $10 million.
But what about the argument that high tax rates dissuade people from working?
And let's contrast it with what everyone on the Republican side claims: that lower marginal rates on top earners have huge economic benefits.
In December of 2017 the president signed into law the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which reduced the corporate tax rate to 21 percent, and lowered individual income tax rates across the board. In the USA, households pay lower tax rates on income in the lowest brackets, and pay increasingly higher tax rates on income in higher brackets.
It's by no means safe to assume that a future Democratic Congress willing to impose a 60 or 70 percent marginal tax rate also would resurrect the full SALT deduction. In fact, prior to the revolutionary bipartisan tax reform of 1986, the distribution of the federal income tax burden was less progressive.
Prior to the 1980s, when President Ronald Reagan slashed tax rates for the wealthiest, the tax rate for any taxpayer that made more than $216,000 a year was 70 percent.
The internet was alight on Friday over yet another viral Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez moment, this time in the form of leaked footage of her dancing while she was in college at her alma mater, Boston University.
He added, "Some folks wondered how much money this would raise".
Tax experts consulted by the Washington Post say that a 70% on income over $10 million could theoretically bring in an additional $72 billion per year in taxes, or $720 billion over a decade. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., last month. What exactly was the newly-elected, self-proclaimed radical proposing?