Reply With Quote
How about that.
http://www.dpcc.senate.gov/files/doc...op%20Rates.pdf
I almost didn't add the quote because of some of the lazier " le Readers" here, just read the damn research and don't be lazy.
Concluding Remarks The top income tax rates have changed considerably since the end of World War II. Throughout
the late-1940s and 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was typically above 90%; today it is 35%.
Additionally, the top capital gains tax rate was 25% in the 1950s and 1960s, 35% in the 1970s;
today it is 15%. The average tax rate faced by the top 0.01% of taxpayers was above 40% until
the mid-1980s; today it is below 25%. Tax rates affecting taxpayers at the top of the income
distribution are currently at their lowest levels since the end of the second World War.
The results of the analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 years in the top marginal tax rate
and the top capital gains tax rate do not appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in
the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, and productivity growth. The
top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie.
However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of
income at the top of the income distribution. As measured by IRS data, the share of income
accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before
falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009 recession. At the same time, the average tax rate paid by the
top 0.1% fell from over 50% in 1945 to about 25% in 2009. Tax policy could have a relation to
how the economic pie is sliced—lower top tax rates may be associated with greater income
disparities.
How about that.
Even more interesting is to ask a certain segment the following questions:
What ended the Great Depression?
What was the top tax rate before that event? What was it after?
What was the federal debt before that event? What was it after?
Just sayin.
Told you there was no "Tickle Down"
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=201986
http://www.ocregister.com/news/-117079-ocprint--.htmlCal State Fullerton's Sonenshein says the spending side of the equation has been the focus of debate, while the government's lagging revenue stream is an equally important component.
And he thinks he knows why lawmakers haven't worked harder to inform the public that taxes are at a historic low.
“What rational person in the political arena,” he said, “is going to argue that taxes aren't very high?”
Both of those could be added to the things conservatives don't know about economics. I remember the threads showing the ideological blind spots of the left/right when it comes to their preferred worldviews. Gotta get those subscribed for good reference. Awful handy.
Broaden the tax base.
That will require my family along with millions of others to shoulder some of the burden of the wars we have been fighting, and not pretended it is someone else who should sacrifice.
Americans have sacrificed a uva lot more in the past. We can do no less now. Maybe it would keep our leaders a bit more cognizant of the costs if we actually, you know, had to pay the costs.
That includes a draft, biyatches. I am with the author of the book "Generals" on that. We let mediocre generals get away with too much for too long, because our professional troops can compensate for a lot of ed leadership.
Does anyone think that we would have so readily given Bush a blank check if going into Iraq meant a draft?
???
(crickets)
Thought so.
Sorry. Off topic rant. Back to your regularly scheduled rants.
Waiting for WC to come in and start talking about how jealous the authors of the study are of rich people. If these people would just stop coveting their neighbors everything would be alright.
Wait for it...
LOL...
Seriously?
This was linked in another thread. I already responded.
Double fail...
Wow... On a more serious note. If the us printed 16 trillion dollars and completely paid off the national debt, mostly to ourselves, would it stimulate the economy, because our debt is paid or would it hyperinflate the dollar because there would be trillions more dollars now floating around?
I'll wait for your response
Also, would we now be $32 trillion in the hole, or would we be even?
I'll wait for your response
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
