Some high income folks are "going John Galt"

[Philosophaster]

What does "going John Galt" mean, you ask? It's the practice of deliberately lowering your income so as to avoid the increased taxes on incomes over $250,000 planned by President Obama. "John Galt" is the main character of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, who worked in a menial job in spite of his high intelligence because he didn't want to experience being "looted" by the tax collectors who would come after him if he made more money. The people who are "going John Galt" plan to either reduce their working hours or fire employees in order to slip under the $250,000 mark:

http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/71770/

Dr. Sharon Poczatek, who runs her own dental practice in Boulder, Colo., said that she too is trying to figure out ways to get out of paying the taxes proposed in Obama’s plan.

“I’ve put thought into how to get under $250,000,” said Poczatek. “It would mean working fewer days which means having fewer employees, seeing fewer patients and taking time off.”

“Generally it means being less productive,” she said.

“The motivation for a lot of people like me – dentists, entrepreneurs, lawyers – is that the more you work the more money you make,” said Poczatek. “But if I’m going to be working just to give it back to the government — it’s de-motivating and demoralizing.”

I guess for some people, being asked to consider much apart from their own bank account is quite "demoralizing."

[DHodges]

There were some people who were deliberately minimizing their (taxable) income under the Bush administration because of a moral objection to helping finance wars of aggression.

[Shahrazad]

Dhodges said,

There were some people who were deliberately minimizing their (taxable) income under the Bush administration because of a moral objection to helping finance wars of aggression.

That was a reasonable decision.

[brokenhead]

There were some people who were deliberately minimizing their (taxable) income under the Bush administration because of a moral objection to helping finance wars of aggression.

Some unsung real heroes there, Dave. Takes balls to put your money where your mouth is.

[vicdan]

I guess for some people, being asked to consider much apart from their own bank account is quite "demoralizing."

The funny thing is that if they considered their banking accounts, they'd be working more, because the income tax rates are marginal, i.e. they only apply to additional amounts. if someone makes $260,000, they would only pay the highest tax rates on the last $10,000, thus their bank account would benefit from going from $250k to $260k.

There are the people obsessed not with their bank account, but with ideologizing their bank account. not productivity itself, but talking about productivity, praising themselves over productivity, denying productivity, etc.

[Shahrazad]

victor said,

if someone makes $260,000, they would only pay the highest tax rates on the last $10,000, thus their bank account would benefit from going from $250k to $260k.

There is this concept called the law of diminishing returns. My income going from $250k to $260k would involve more discomfort in terms of work, and I'd be getting a smaller return than on the first $250k because of the higher taxes. Another way to put this would be that my bank account going from $250k to $260k would take more hours of work than what it took to go from $240k to $250k, and the hours of work themselves would be more demanding on my body and my quality of life. At the point where this decrease in quality of life is greater than the increase of income, I'd rather not work.

[Carl G]

I think I've by now passed the 250K mark for my whole life. So, for me it's a fucking non-issue. Whether those high-income folks decide to cut back on their efforts, I couldn't care less. I don't believe I've ever even met anyone on that income level.

*goes back to chopping wood*