That's the problem here.
Taxation of the type you are defending crushes the incentive to perform or achieve above one's peers. It encourages people to strive only for mediocrity, as striving to be exceptional is essentially pointless.
"Men did not love Rome because she was great. She was great because they had loved her." -- G.K. Chesterton
Can you tell which one is getting screwed over? If so, don't cry like a little baby. Simply vote for the opposite one. of have you already voted? I see 0 votes for Option A so far.
I would choose:
C) A $250,000 income with a 0.00 tax burden
the one crying like a baby appears to be the one who is trying to excuse being a failure economically while trying to salve his butt hurt envy by trying to justify confiscatory taxes on people more prosperous and industrious than he is
how's that for a poll answer