Reply With QuoteThis subject appear to be beaten to death on this forum. Why do you want to steal more of my money? I want to have the fruit of my labor, it belongs to me not the government!
THE TRUTH ABOUT TAXES: History Suggests High Tax Rates On Rich People Do Not Hurt The
The central issue of this year's Presidential campaign will likely be the crappy economy. Specifically, the candidates will argue about how best to fix our high unemployment and massive budget deficit.
And one of the biggest points in that argument will be taxes.
Specifically, what should be done with them.
Obviously, no one likes paying higher taxes, and everyone likes paying lower taxes.
But we live in the real world, not fantasy-land. And in the real world, sometimes people have to do things they would prefer not to do--such as pay taxes.
But the disagreement on this issue, as well as the facts surrounding it, is intense.
Democrats, to the extent they care about the budget deficit, want to raise taxes, which they say are too low--especially on rich people.
Republicans, meanwhile, generally say that taxes are too high and that the budget deficit should be addressed with spending cuts. To get the economy back on track, Republicans argue, you need to give Americans an incentive to work hard--by letting them keep more of what they earn. Republicans also argue that raising taxes would clobber an already fragile economy.
So who's right?
Are taxes too high? Or are they too low?
Do high tax rates on "rich people" create a lazy population in which no one has an incentive to work hard?
And what about the Republican mantra that cutting taxes is always good for the economy, while raising taxes is always bad?
Thanks to the Tax Foundation and other sources, we've analyzed tax rates over the past century, along with government revenue and spending over the same period.
This analysis revealed a lot of surprising conclusions, including the following:
- Today's government spending levels are indeed too high, at least relative to the average level of tax revenue the government has generated over the past 60 years. Unless Americans are willing to radically increase the amount of taxes they pay relative to GDP, government spending must eventually be cut.
- Today's income tax rates are strikingly low relative to the rates of the past century, especially for rich people. For most of the century, including some boom times, top-bracket income tax rates were much higher than they are today.
- Contrary to what Republicans would have you believe, super-high tax rates on rich people do not appear to hurt the economy or make people lazy: During the 1950s and early 1960s, the top bracket income tax rate was over 90%--and the economy, middle-class, and stock market boomed.
- Super-low tax rates on rich people also appear to be correlated with unsustainable sugar highs in the economy--brief, enjoyable booms followed by protracted busts. They also appear to be correlated with very high inequality. (For example, see the 1920s and now).
- Periods of very low tax rates have been followed by periods with very high tax rates, and vice versa. So history suggests that tax rates will soon start going up.
This subject appear to be beaten to death on this forum. Why do you want to steal more of my money? I want to have the fruit of my labor, it belongs to me not the government!
Its basically another Rethuglican bashing point piece.Originally Posted by joethesixpack
I'd like to see them impliment some high tax and just watch everything crumble away.
This will be a fun discussion to read about.
Rage posts!!
Somehow i feel ive seen this argument before.
How much do you earn?
California has high taxes and they're obviously doing something right.
The subject is a distraction to build yet another identity politics, divide and conquer shell game to foist the supposed two parties on voters again. Manipulating the property redistribution license is a meaningless subject. Instead we must reduce the over burdening managerial elite hell bent on meddling in personal affairs and the corrupt shills determined to get rich giving your wealth and license to the powerful monied interests that put them in government.
The only political platform that should be considered is one that punishes centralized thievery and parasitism by reducing their overall influence over people via some amount of Federal power redistribution. Shrink the Fed, gut its budget like a fish, discard portions and redistribute others of its power back to the State, local and individual. Get involved purging the parties of people who desire overly centralized authority’s ability to extreme meddling and wealth redistribution and install representatives showing a broader range of the voter demographics, not just the ABA, FIRE, MIC, Unions etc... Do this first and then d1cker over taxes, rights and other items of lesser import.
If we don’t redistribute power to some large degree away from the Fed, no amount of centralized fiat, money or regulation, will save the US from the economic and social disaster the managerial elite and their backers will bring on everyone.
Awaiting the standard political shill “austerity” and “deregulation” BS memes of the oligarchs again…
There I go tilting windmills.
Paul Krugman says the Tax Foundation isnt a reliable source
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/200...liable-source/
even CBPP Center on Budget and Policy Priorities calls their studies bad, citing repeated "methodological errors" and "reliance on early projections without hard data."
So who to believe?
Well, the article speaks for itself. All we need to do is cut spending by a certain percentage from everything (like 10%) eliminate tax breaks and loophole targeting the wealthy, and raise taxes on the wealthy.
Ah-man Puffs, where were you pre-2009?California has high taxes and they're obviously doing something right.Not nice to take cheap shots after the worst economic meltdown since the Great Depression.
If you actually believe this load of crap you are truly a fool. One only has to look back at the Carter administration to understand what high tax rates do to an economy. How many communist countries have you visited? I have visited two, in both cases the economies were stagnated and the infrastrucure was falling apart. No one had any vested interest in maintaining what they do not own, The answer to this overall can be found in the business model of Costco. They pay the employee's fairly and have full benefits. The opposite is Sam's Club, the employee's are assholes and generally have bad attitudes. Treat people like a dog and they will bark and bite. Giving every dog a free bone makes a lazy animal with no purpose, other than to create mischief. Your cited post speaks volumes about your intellect and values.
Communist Countries did not have taxation. BTDT. Just saying.
Enough, and I want to keep all of it.
Good luck with that. Where i am from , if you dont pay taxes somebody will show up and ask for it sooner or later. Mostly sooner.
Posting Permissions
