Zero Taxes Under $50K: The “Build a Longer Table” Tax Plan

by Matthew Allen | Mar 18, 2025

Listen to this episode

Okay, let’s get into this

Here’s a quote you might’ve heard that’s at the heart of this idea:

“When you have more than you need, build a longer table, not a higher fence.”

It’s such a great quote, even the Bible echoes it. Check this out:

• Luke 14: Jesus tells his dinner host, “Don’t invite the people who can pay you back, invite the ones who can’t. Feed the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind. They can’t repay you, but you’ll be blessed for giving a shit.” (Okay, I paraphrased the last part, but you get it.)
• Matthew 25: Jesus gets super specific: “When you feed the hungry, clothe the naked, care for the sick, or visit the imprisoned, you’re actually doing it for me.” It’s like he’s saying, “Hey, helping others is basically helping me, so don’t be a selfish prick.” (Again, paraphrasing.)

Now, I’m not really religious, but damn, Jesus was out there speaking truth to power. Can we all just agree that life is better when we’re sitting together at a longer table, and everyone gets a plate?

Disclaimer

Look, I’m not a tax wizard. I’m not some genius economist, financial guru, or even someone who can confidently calculate a tip without my phone. I’m just a dad trying to make sense of the chaos out there. Sure, my family is doing okay, but holy hell, have you seen how rough it is for so many others? And it just feels like the political establishment doesn’t give a flying crap.

If you’ve read my blog about RUBIs and why they voted for Trump, you’ll probably remember: a huge chunk of Trump voters backed him because they believe he’ll put more cash in their pockets. Are they right? Probably not. But hey, desperate people make desperate choices.

Fair warning, I’m about to simplify a lot of this tax stuff. If you’re an expert, you might want to prepare for some a little eye-rolling. For the rest of you, stay open-minded. You might walk away with some new found insight. Or at least a laugh or two.

The problem with our current tax system

Here’s where it gets messy:

• Low-income earners are getting punched in the wallet with taxes they can’t afford. These folks need every dollar to survive, and yet we’re yanking it out of their hands.
• Meanwhile, the wealthiest among us end up paying a smaller share of taxes than you’d expect. But they’re not struggling, they’re thriving. I mean, this seems like the epitome of unfair.
• So why? Because for decades, politicians have prioritized tax policies that benefit the wealthy instead of providing meaningful relief to those who need it most. It’s not that the wealthy are dodging responsibility per se, it’s just that the system has been weighted to favor them.
• And let’s be honest: taxes are ridiculously complicated. It’s like the system was designed to make your eyes glaze over with numbers, forms, and jargon so intentionally tangled that most people feel like they’re solving a riddle written by an evil wizard.
• Meanwhile, the ultra-wealthy hire armies of accountants to navigate the madness, and come out ahead. Convenient, right?

Even Einstein hated taxes

Interesting sidenote: Albert Einstein — yes, the Einstein — once said, “The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax.” If the guy who redefined space and time couldn’t wrap his head around taxes, we’re in pretty good company.

What if we flipped the script?

Imagine a better tax system that:

• gives lower-income earners direct relief. Think stimulus check vibes, but better.
• tells the ultra-wealthy, “Hey, you’re doing great, so it’s your turn to chip in more.”
• actually reduces income inequality instead of making it worse.

Is it really so wild to ask the people with the most money to chip in a little, to help those people just trying to survive? That’s what “building a longer table” is all about, giving everyone a chance to sit down and eat, without a fence in sight.

But first, a detour so boring we added jokes to survive

Alright, buckle up, because before we can start building that longer table, we need to take a quick detour into tax history. I know, it sounds about as exciting as reading the terms and conditions on a software update, but don’t worry. This ride comes with a few laughs along the way. Plus, by the end, you’ll see why the whole “build a longer table” idea actually makes a lot of sense. Let’s dive in.

Taxes: a thrilling saga of math, money, and imbalance

Believe it or not, tax history is something people actually study. On purpose. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Once upon a time, the wealthiest Americans handed over a bigger slice of the pie. Here’s a quick, mildly entertaining rundown of how tax rates have shifted, because who doesn’t love a good tax story?

• World War I: Top earners paid up to 77%. The government needed revenue, and the wealthiest shoulders were the broadest to carry the load.
• World War II: Tax rates soared to 94%. High earners contributed heavily to support the war effort, and the system worked.
• 1950s and 1960s: Even in peacetime, the wealthiest paid rates up to 91%. It helped fund infrastructure, education, and economic growth — for everyone.
• 1970s: The top tax rates came down a bit, but they were still at 70%.

Back when these top tax rates were higher, life for the average American was pretty solid. The economy was chugging along, and the middle class was thriving. Uncle Sam was asking the wealthy to chip in a lot more, which helped pay for things like schools, highways, and those shiny post-war suburbs.

Income inequality (the gap between rich and poor) was way lower than today. Look, it wasn’t perfect, there were still plenty of problems, especially for marginalized communities. But overall, folks were buying homes, building nest eggs, and taking actual vacations without maxing out their credit cards. Turns out, when the wealthy pay more, everybody else gets a bit more of the pie. Who knew?

Reagan’s 1986 tax reform: when “trickle down” became a punchline

In 1986, tax rates for the wealthiest were slashed to 28%, in the name of this clever new concept called “Trickle Down Economics”. Get this: the idea was to have the wealthy pay way less in taxes and that would somehow mean that the rest of us would benefit. Yeah, bonkers.

Imagine somebody wealthy saying: “So all this money I used to contribute? Yeah, no. I’m going to keep all that now, and, trust me, this will actually help you more in the end.”

See how clever that is?

Interesting sidenote: Long before Reagan came along with his clever “trickle down” idea, this economic strategy had a much more honest nickname: “The Horse and Sparrow Theory.” The idea was that if you feed a horse enough oats, eventually some will be crapped out for the sparrows to pick through. In this metaphor, the wealthy are the horse, and us poor folk are the sparrows. We’re just birds eating leftover horseshit from the rich. At least they were honest about it back then. Mmmm good!

This was a massive change. For over 70 years, the wealthiest had been paying their fair share of taxes. Sure, there were issues with the tax code. But at the heart of this tax reform bill was a huge promise that if we just reduced taxes on the wealthy, we’d all benefit.

That is a whopper of a promise. And it basically boils down to “trust us”.

And just to be clear, this tax reform bill had broad bi-partisan support. Even Democrats were largely on-board with it. So while the idea of trickle down economics is typically credited to Reagan, Democrats were right in there with him, pushing this massive change.

Since then, tax rates for the wealthy have hovered between 35% and 39%. While these rates are somewhat higher than 28%, they have also come with new loopholes and deductions that favor the top earners. One of the original theories of the 1986 tax reform bill was that it would be “fairer” because it would eliminate all these loopholes.

Funny how those little buggers just sneak back in there.

The ripple effects of 1986 and beyond

So, since those top tax rates were cut in 1986 with that whopper promise of “trust us”, it hasn’t all been sunshine and bacon the way they said it would be. Instead, three things have happened:

• The wealthiest earned more, a lot more: Over the past few decades, the top 1% have seen their fortunes skyrocket, grabbing an even bigger slice of the pie. Meanwhile everyone else has been left hoping for crumbs. Overall, the economy has been growing, but the benefits have all been piling up at the top.
• Stagnant wages for Workers: For the bottom 50% of earners, paychecks barely grew, even though productivity boomed. People worked harder, but the rewards didn’t keep pace.
• Eroding Public Programs: Tax cuts meant less revenue for programs like education, healthcare, and infrastructure. These are things we all rely on, but they’ve been starved of funding.

Bottom line: trickle down economics simply hasn’t worked.

In reality it has turned out to be a cruel joke, and one that we’re still paying for. Some might generously call it a “misguided theory”, but I call it a scam. They knew exactly what they were doing. And the data over the last 30 years is conclusive: the trickle down concept is an economic failure for average Americans.

• How four decades of tax cuts fueled inequality
  (The Center for Public Integrity)
• Tax cuts for the wealthy only benefit the rich: debunking trickle-down economics
  (London School of Economics)
• New Data Illustrate the Failure of the Trickle-Down Experiment
  (The Center for American Progress)

Inequality between rich and poor has increased, massively. And the impact on economic growth: minimal.

For the wealthiest among us? Well, it’s clear they’ve made out quite nicely. But it’s time we got back on track with a tax system that is fair and balanced. (No pun intended.)

When Even Millionaires Say “Tax Us More”, You Know It’s Time to Listen

Look, this isn’t about villains or heroes, it’s about leveling the playing field. We’re not here to demonize the wealthy; that misses the point. Hell, some of my best friends are wealthy, as the saying goes. Instead, I choose to believe that most of the wealthiest folks in our country are reasonable and are smart enough to realize that a broader prosperity is good for everyone, even them.

Skeptical? Here’s why I say that. In 2024, research firm YouGov polled millionaires in the US. Turns out, a majority of them are totally on board with paying more in taxes. I know, right? I’m just as floored as you are.

Here’s what they found:

• 60 percent of millionaires said they’d support higher taxes on incomes above $100 million. Yup, even they understand the value of their super-rich friends bearing a bigger share of the tax burden.
• More than 60 percent believe that rapidly expanding inequality is a threat to democracy. They’re right, and it’s refreshing to see them acknowledge it.
• A whopping 91 percent agreed that the concentration of extreme wealth lets the wealthy buy political influence. Shocking, but not exactly a revelation for the rest of us.
• Over 75 percent admitted that the wealthy enjoy loopholes and tax strategies unavailable to the average taxpayer. Basically, they’re saying, “Yeah, we know the system’s rigged, and we’re benefiting from it.”

So just to make sure this point hits home: Even the majority of wealthy folks in this country agree the wealthy should pay more taxes. They seem to have their hearts and heads in the right place. Refreshing, isn’t it?

However, a small minority of wealthy individuals don’t agree. Let’s call these folks the Hoarders. Even kindergartners know how to share crayons, but these Hoarders think sharing is something only suckers do. They clutch their loopholes like precious treasure, avoiding taxes with the zeal of a dragon guarding its hoard.

And that’s just sad. It’s like: “Who hurt you?”

And let’s be real, these are probably the people Jesus had in mind when he mentioned “selfish pricks” back in Matthew 25. (Again, paraphrasing.)

So what’s the takeaway here?

If the majority of wealthy people can see the value in creating a fairer tax system, maybe there’s hope for all of us. It’s a reminder that helping others, whether through taxes, donations, or good old fashioned kindness, isn’t just about following the Golden Rule. It’s about making life better for everyone, even the wealthy.

Where did all the money go? Left over cash since the 1950s

Okay, let’s pivot and take a look at how dramatically finances have changed for average Americans since “trickle down” came along in 1986.

Here’s what we did: we started with the median income that families earned in each decade and adjusted it for inflation and the cost of living. Then we factored in essential expenses (think housing, healthcare, and education) to see how much leftover income families had.

Here's the key info in chart form:

What we found is kinda wild:

• Sure, median incomes have been going up (from $48k to $86k)
• But essentials like housing, healthcare, and education have been surging (from $15k to $80k)
• Leftover income has been shrinking decade by decade
• By the 2010s, it’s barely enough for a decent vacation, let alone savings
• And certainly not enough to buy a house

So, let's just recap. In the 1950s: $33,000 left over. By the 2010s: only $6,000.

This is seriously disturbing: families are working harder and earning more on paper, but somehow, they’ve got less wiggle room than ever. This is all kinds of wrong.

What the heck are tax brackets anyway?

Welcome to the magical world of U.S. tax brackets: a system so thrilling it’s rumored to have been the inspiration for bedtime stories that put accountants’ kids to sleep.

Who’s typically in each tax bracket?

From struggling workers to the ultra-wealthy, everyone fits somewhere.

Generally, your income determines how much you owe in taxes. The brackets start low and climb higher the more you earn. Pretty easy, right?

But wait! There’s this exasperating hidden gotcha that nobody explains: like many people, I thought you just find your salary on the chart and that’s your tax rate. Wrong. (But more on that in a moment.)

Arbitrary and absurd: the truth about tax rates

Let’s get one thing straight: there’s no magic formula behind the tax rates or the income brackets we’re using today. They weren’t handed down on stone tablets or dictated by some universal economic truth. Nope. They’re a messy mix of political bargaining that, surprise surprise, tends to favor the wealthy. And political inertia where nobody has stepped back to ask, “Wait, does this even make sense anymore?”

That time I almost tanked my own salary because I can’t math

A few years ago, I got a job offer for $195,000, a huge deal for me. I grew up in a paycheck-to-paycheck household, watching my parents struggle to pay bills. I was the first in my family to graduate college, and for most of my life, I watched my bank account like a hawk. So yeah, $195k felt like winning the lottery.

Then I looked up tax brackets and had a full-blown oh shit moment.

At $195k, I’d be in the 32% tax bracket. At $190k, I’d be in the 24% bracket. My brain short-circuited:

• $190k minus 24% taxes = $144k take-home (or so I thought)
• $195k minus 32% taxes = $132k take-home?!

What?! Cue the panic: “Am I actually going to make LESS money by earning MORE? What kind of broken system is this?” I was so freaked out, I almost asked them to change the offer to be for less money. Yep, I went full potato on that one.

Thankfully, I did some research and learned the truth. Tax brackets don’t work the way I thought. The higher tax rate only applies to the portion of your income that falls into that bracket, not your entire income. And that’s when I had what I like to call my Cookie Epiphany.

My cookie epiphany

Imagine your income as a stack of 60 cookies, and the government wants some to share with everyone else. But they don’t take the same number from every part of the stack:

• First 10 cookies: The government only takes 10% (1 cookie)
• Next 20 cookies: They take 20% (4 cookies)
• Last 30 cookies: They take 30% (9 cookies)

So you have 46 cookies left, and you paid 14 in taxes. But notice, they didn’t take 30% of your whole stack, just from the last stack. Swap cookies for cash, and that’s basically how tax brackets work.

From cookies to cash: let’s talk real numbers

Now let’s break it down with real dough. Say you make $60,000. Here’s how your taxes would look under the 2024 brackets for a single person:

• First $11,000: The government takes 10% ($1,100)
• Next $36,000: They take 12% ($4,320)
• Last $13,000: They take 22% ($2,860)

Total tax? $8,280. Even though part of your income falls into the 22% bracket, you’re not paying 22% on the whole $60k, just on the top portion.

So no, you don’t make less by earning more. And that’s how I stopped freaking out, accepted the job offer, and learned to make peace with sharing my cookies.

Alright, we're finally done with all the boring stuff leading up to the main event. Thanks for sticking with me. Isn't this fun, all this talk about taxes? 🫠

The “Build a Longer Table” (BALT) tax plan

So here’s the idea: What if we took a page from the past, when paychecks stretched further and the wealthiest among us contributed a bit more to the common good? It’s not about punishment; it’s about generosity and balance. Those with the most resources can afford to lend a hand. And in doing so, they help create a stronger, better-supported society for everyone. That’s not just fair, it’s pretty damn magnanimous.

Here’s how the “Build a Longer Table” plan would shake out:

• Those folks in the first two tax brackets, who make less than $50,000 a year: Zero taxes. Yep, that’s right. Instead of 10 and 12% taxes, they pay zero. That means they’ll keep over $5,000 of their hard-earned money. That’s life changing for over 80 million Americans in this country.
• For the folks making $50,000 – $240,000: Lower taxes, more money in their pockets.
• For people making $500,000: Essentially the same taxes you pay now.
• For millionaires and beyond: Yeah, you’re paying more. Instead of a 35% tax rate, it’ll be 75%. Sure, you’ll probably notice. But let’s not kid ourselves, you already have significant wealth, and you’re going to be just fine.

The BALT Plan vs the current plan

What it means for different income levels

What's the TLDR?

• So to sum it all up, the lowest earning people will pay zero taxes, because they’re in the most precarious financial situations and need the most help.
• This extra cash can literally be the difference between making rent or not, putting food on the table or not, or any of the other essentials. Life changing.
• The middle of the pack will also pay less in taxes, and this will have big economic effects. (More on that in a bit.)
• And the wealthiest among us will pay more, because the wealthiest shoulders are the broadest to carry the load.

Why this works for everyone

Here’s the sneaky genius of this plan: It benefits everybody, even the wealthy.

• First $50,000? Tax-free for everyone, even wealthy people.
• Lower taxes even for income amounts up to $240,000.
• Higher rates only kick in on the new income above those thresholds.

That means the guy making $10 million a year is still paying less on his first $240k than he does now. The higher rates only hit the new money above that line.

Because, remember: this is how the “cookie” tax system works. The official name is “progressive taxation”, but I like cookies better.

How we could implement this

Any big change like this needs a practical roadmap. Here’s how we’d actually pull this off:

• Gradual phase-in over 5 years: No shocking the system! We’d slowly adjust rates each year until we reach our targets.
• Income averaging for variable earners: Small business owners and freelancers, we’ve got your back. Had one great year? We’ll let you spread that income across tax years so you’re not unfairly penalized.
• Closing loopholes + proper IRS funding: A tax plan is only as good as its enforcement. Let’s give the IRS the tools they need to make sure everyone pays their fair share.
• Preserving charitable giving: We can adjust deduction rules to make sure philanthropy doesn’t take a hit. Generosity should always be encouraged!

Nothing here is rocket science, just common sense adjustments to make sure the plan works for real people in the real world.

The bottom line

When you understand how tax brackets work, this plan is a win for all of us. More relief for the people who need it most, and a fairer system for everyone else. And yeah, the wealthy pay more, but guess what? They are the strongest among us.

Best of all, these new tax brackets actually generate more revenue than the current structure, ensuring we can fund schools, social programs, and maybe even fix that giant pothole on your street, all while putting more money in the hands of everyday Americans.

And here’s the really cool part: when lower- and middle-class folks have more cash, they actually spend it on things like groceries, clothes, or fixing that leaky roof. That’s pumping money right back into the economy. Compare that to the wealthy, who stash their extra tax savings in investments that mostly benefit, you guessed it, other rich people.

Turns out, giving everyday folks more buying power isn’t just fair, it’s great for business.

Higher taxes for the wealthy only affects their new money

Let’s clear one thing up, because I’ve heard some weird notions about the idea of raising taxes on the wealthy. Here’s the truth:

• When we talk about higher taxes for top earners, we’re only talking about the new money they make.
• If someone’s pulling in over $600k a year, chances are they’ve been in that income bracket for years. Guess what? Their bank accounts, vacation homes, and stock portfolios? Completely untouched. Nobody’s coming for their sailboat, so let’s all just take a deep breath and relax.

So no, nobody’s raiding anyone’s bank account or swooping in to seize their stuff. Wealthy folks aren’t losing what they already have, just sharing a bit more of the new pie they’re baking.

Seems fair, doesn’t it?

Why the “Build a Longer Table” (BALT) plan could really shake things up

It's not just about numbers on a spreadsheet. It’s about getting real relief to the people who are struggling the most. And the best part? The messaging is so simple even a campaign ad wouldn’t screw it up:

• Make less than $50k? Pay zero taxes!
• Make up to $250k? Pay less taxes!
• Making $500k? Your taxes stay the same!
• Making over $1 million? You’re pitching in to help your neighbors with only the new money you make. Your generosity is going to fuel an economic boom, and that benefits you just as much as anybody else.

This is the kind of clear, no-BS message that actually resonates with people, especially the RUBIs who are notoriously inattentive.

If Democrats are looking for ideas that will actually land with voters, a plan like this could be a massive game-changer. It’s fair, it’s easy to understand, and it speaks to what people care about most: having more financial security, so they can breathe easier.

It’s time to build that longer table

Look, I know what some of you might be thinking: “Yeah, yeah, this is just changing the tax brackets. Big whoop. It’s nothing revolutionary.” And you’re not wrong. This isn’t some galaxy-brain, earth-shattering idea. But sometimes, the simplest, most obvious solutions sitting right in front of us are the best ones.

And here’s the deal: the current system is lopsided. It’s squeezing the people who can least afford it while missing the opportunity to have the wealthiest among us lend a helping hand and strengthen the economy for everyone. What we’re talking about here isn’t rocket science. It’s just rebalancing things to make them more reasonable.

Pearl-Clutchers vs. Problem-Solvers

BTW, let’s be totally upfront about something: the moment we propose this plan, Republicans will lose their fucking minds. They’ll break out their dumbshit “communism stamp” and start screaming about the apocalypse, say that freedom is dying, and whatever other fear-mongering bullshit they can muster. I can already see the Fox News graphics now, it’s all so tedious and predictable.

But here’s the thing: fuck those guys.

This plan isn’t for the pearl-clutching Republicans who think any tax on the wealthy is one step away from gulags and bread lines. It’s not for the Ayn Rand fan club or the “my third yacht might be at risk” crowd. It’s for the mom working two jobs who can’t afford childcare, the young couple drowning in student debt while trying to save for a house, and the millions of Americans who are one unexpected bill away from disaster.

These people are suffering. They don’t care about ideological purity tests. They only care about being able to breathe a little easier at the end of each month. As Democrats, we need to grow a backbone and stop worrying about what knuckle-dragging troglodytes like Tucker Carlson might say. Let’s have the courage to fight for policies that actually help regular people, even when the wealthy and powerful push back. Because if we don’t, who will?

Democrats, it’s time we picked a fucking side. Are we with the corrupt, freedom-hating, billionaire-slobbering, pick-me crowd? Or are we on the side of those that are suffering and desperately need our help. To me, the answer is obvious, and it’s time we do something about it.

And hey, if you’ve got an economics degree and want to poke holes in this plan and point out that I rounded numbers and approximated shit, be my guest. Tear it apart. Challenge it. Go wild. But don’t lose sight of the bigger picture: this is about fixing a broken system and creating a tax structure that actually works for the majority of people, not just the privileged few.

At its core, the “Build a Longer Table” tax plan is about fairness, stability, and shared prosperity. It’s about making sure everyone has a seat at the table, a meal on their plate, and a fair shot at the opportunities we all deserve.

And if we can achieve that? Then we all win.