Regarding the top tax rate

[Green Arrow]

Opponents of raising the tax rate for the country's top earners argue that it will hurt the economy if the top marginal tax rate is anything but zero.

If you believe that the top marginal tax rate should be zero or near-zero to save our country from economic nightmare, then why is it that some of the most prosperous decades in American history, from 1948 to about 1975, sported a top marginal tax rate that was as high as 91% and never dropped lower than 70%?

[Matty]

I don't know anybody who thinks it should be zero. You gotta link?

[Peter1469]

I think that many advocate for a lower, rather than higher tax rate for all tax brackets. I don't think that anyone advocates for a zero tax rate, except for the low earners and by democrats.

[Matty]

It is time for a flat tax, set it where you want it. No exceptions, no excuses, no exemptions. Everybody get some skin in the game.

[Green Arrow]

I don't know anybody who thinks it should be zero. You gotta link?

I also said near zero. What do you think it should be? It's at 39% now.

[nic34]

We should go back to pre-Reagan post JFK rates.

[Green Arrow]

I think that many advocate for a lower, rather than higher tax rate for all tax brackets. I don't think that anyone advocates for a zero tax rate, except for the low earners and by democrats.

Four years into his presidency, in 1927, Coolidge reduced taxes to the point where only the top 2% were paying income taxes. Why not go back to that?

[Newpublius]

Opponents of raising the tax rate for the country's top earners argue that it will hurt the economy if the top marginal tax rate is anything but zero.

If you believe that the top marginal tax rate should be zero or near-zero to save our country from economic nightmare, then why is it that some of the most prosperous decades in American history, from 1948 to about 1975, sported a top marginal tax rate that was as high as 91% and never dropped lower than 70%?

because there's a difference between a single tax rate and the aggregate tax burden imposed on society as a whole. In the 1950s, government spending was much lower, this, in fact is the aggregate tax rate imposed on society, the physical flow of goods and services flowing from the private sector to the public sector. The negative impact of taxes was offset by the lower taxes felt elsewhere, for instance payroll taxes.

[Matty]

For every single person. Flat tax. You want 90%" sure, 90% of a dollar is 90 cents. Tax all welfare, EBT, phones, housing subsidies as income. Works for me.

[Matty]

Four years into his presidency, in 1927, Coolidge reduced taxes to the point where only the top 2% were paying income taxes. Why not go back to that?
Because it's amoral.

[Peter1469]

We should go back to pre-Reagan post JFK rates.

With all of the deductions too?

[Matty]

Opponents of raising the tax rate for the country's top earners argue that it will hurt the economy if the top marginal tax rate is anything but zero.

If you believe that the top marginal tax rate should be zero or near-zero to save our country from economic nightmare, then why is it that some of the most prosperous decades in American history, from 1948 to about 1975, sported a top marginal tax rate that was as high as 91% and never dropped lower than 70%?


You said, "anything but zero."

[Green Arrow]

You said, "anything but zero."

Yes, and right after that, I asked those who believe it should be zero OR NEAR ZERO a question.

[Peter1469]

Yes, and right after that, I asked those who believe it should be zero OR NEAR ZERO a question.

I would like to see income taxes at zero.

We need the Fair Tax.

[Green Arrow]

I would like to see income taxes at zero.

We need the Fair Tax.

I'm not sold on the Fair Tax yet, but I am morally opposed to income taxes.

[Matty]

Four years into his presidency, in 1927, Coolidge reduced taxes to the point where only the top 2% were paying income taxes. Why not go back to that?


I'm not sold on the Fair Tax yet, but I am morally opposed to income taxes.


Except for for two per cent of the citizenry?

[Green Arrow]

Except for for two per cent of the citizenry?

Morally opposed means morally opposed, no exceptions.

[Refugee]

You're running out of money to finance your big government welfare state. Now you'll move on to grabbing it from the wealthy and when you've bled them dry or they leave . . . . ?

[Redrose]

It is time for a flat tax, set it where you want it. No exceptions, no excuses, no exemptions. Everybody get some skin in the game.
A flat tax would be very destructive. It sounds great, but it isn't. Many, many people getting refunds today would be paying a lot in tax. Also, the level of flat tax can always be raised by our money hungry government. It would be black and white, no grey area. You owe it. Be careful what you wish for.

[Green Arrow]

You're running out of money to finance your big government welfare state. Now you'll move on to grabbing it from the wealthy and when you've bled them dry or they leave . . . . ?

Would you like to address the OP?

[The Xl]

It doesn't really matter what you raise the rate to as long as the uber wealthy have loopholes, it will just leave the upper middle class and middle class to shoulder the burden. Most of that money is going to special interests anyway

[Peter1469]

I'm not sold on the Fair Tax yet, but I am morally opposed to income taxes.

I am morally opposed to an income tax (productivity tax). A sales tax is easy to game. Buy used stuff when you can.

[ChoppedLiver]

...then why is it that some of the most prosperous decades in American history, from 1948 to about 1975, sported a top marginal tax rate that was as high as 91% and never dropped lower than 70%?

Perhaps you should learn the difference between what the "tax rate" and the actual "effective tax rate" is before you ask questions like that.
Also, the high WARTIME tax rate was on the rich that was offset by the gobs and gobs of money the feds. were throwing at them for various wartime production materials and such.

:cool:

[Green Arrow]

Perhaps you should learn the difference between what the "tax rate" and the actual "effective tax rate" is before you ask questions like that.

Or, I can just ask the question because I'm not concerned with what the effective tax rate is, since nobody ever complains about the ETR but does complain about the plain old tax rate.

[zelmo1234]

Opponents of raising the tax rate for the country's top earners argue that it will hurt the economy if the top marginal tax rate is anything but zero.

If you believe that the top marginal tax rate should be zero or near-zero to save our country from economic nightmare, then why is it that some of the most prosperous decades in American history, from 1948 to about 1975, sported a top marginal tax rate that was as high as 91% and never dropped lower than 70%?

Well we have been through this before

I would gladly change todays tax structure for that of the 70's because those were feel good numbers (though that actually might work for the Democratic party, as they do a lot of feel good stuff)

The truth is back between the 1900's and 1976 when Carter did away with many deductions? The top earners in the country rarely paid any taxes and if they did it was very little!

But no one wants to talk about being able to deduct any and all recreation, meals, cars, interest on credit cards automobiles, trips and vacations.

nearly EVERY dollar spent by the wealthy was deductible and anything including the lawn mowers were able to be depreciated

It was the era of the pony for girls, because it was totally tax deductible and you could call yourself a farm, and lose money.

So should we go back to the pre Carter days? Hell I am all for it!

[zelmo1234]

I think that many advocate for a lower, rather than higher tax rate for all tax brackets. I don't think that anyone advocates for a zero tax rate, except for the low earners and by democrats.

There are those that advocate for 0% corporate taxes!

We are at 28% counting the ACA tax and that is the highest rate in the world on corporations

[zelmo1234]

I also said near zero. What do you think it should be? It's at 39% now.

Ahhhh! you are forgetting the 3%n ACA premium on to of the 39%

making it 42% on the top wage earners! The question should be can anyone actually justify taking 42% of someone's earnings in taxes?

Who in their right mind would think that is fair

[zelmo1234]

We should go back to pre-Reagan post JFK rates.

Can we have the deductions too? If so I am all for it!

[nic34]

Zel, that was the Reagan administration when we lost those deductions. :wink:

Yeah, sure we go back to higher marginal rates but we still get the deductions.

[zelmo1234]

Four years into his presidency, in 1927, Coolidge reduced taxes to the point where only the top 2% were paying income taxes. Why not go back to that?

Love that Idea too, get ride of SS and the social safety nets! Get rid of most of the government departments, and all of the BS that they fund including bailouts.

Then the 2% cold fund the government with huge surpluses

[nic34]

Four years into his presidency, in 1927, Coolidge reduced taxes to the point where only the top 2% were paying income taxes. Why not go back to that?

What do you do with seniors living in poverty? Go back to soup kitchens?

Maybe a 50 year lifespan is enough after all.

[Green Arrow]

What do you do with seniors living in poverty? Go back to soup kitchens?

Maybe a 50 year lifespan is enough after all.

Oh, don't start that crap with me. You know better.

[Green Arrow]

Ahhhh! you are forgetting the 3%n ACA premium on to of the 39%

making it 42% on the top wage earners! The question should be can anyone actually justify taking 42% of someone's earnings in taxes?

Who in their right mind would think that is fair

Well, that great socialist Dwight Eisenhower for one, who had the top tax rate at 91%.

[zelmo1234]

A flat tax would be very destructive. It sounds great, but it isn't. Many, many people getting refunds today would be paying a lot in tax. Also, the level of flat tax can always be raised by our money hungry government. It would be black and white, no grey area. You owe it. Be careful what you wish for.

A refund is only stupidity, any time you want to make an interest free loan to me for a year and then I can give you a 55 thousand page claim form so it is likely that you will not get everything that is coming to you? Let me know!

But flat or an equal tax on income can be progressive in nature as well.

For example on the first 15K that everyone earns including the rich it could be zero, some would make it nearly through the year, the really wealthy would not make it a week!

Then form 15 to 30K it could be 5% or 3% or whatever!

At the end of the year a person that just worked and received a W-2 could file his taxes in less than 10 min

the only deduction that I would like to see remain is charity, and I don't consider political action charity

[zelmo1234]

Would you like to address the OP?

He did you advocated only taxing the top 2% you brought it up, so why is it not fair game?

Because you don't have an answer for it?

[zelmo1234]

It doesn't really matter what you raise the rate to as long as the uber wealthy have loopholes, it will just leave the upper middle class and middle class to shoulder the burden. Most of that money is going to special interests anyway

Let me know when the middle class start shouldering the burden?

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/top10-percent-income-earners

Now back before Reagan your statement was actually true, because until Carter the wealthy rarely paid taxes

[Green Arrow]

He did you advocated only taxing the top 2% you brought it up, so why is it not fair game?

Because you don't have an answer for it?

No, because it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. His question is about a big welfare state, which I have never advocated. This thread is about the top tax rate.

[Green Arrow]

Let me know when the middle class start shouldering the burden?

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/top10-percent-income-earners

Now back before Reagan your statement was actually true, because until Carter the wealthy rarely paid taxes

The middle class shouldn't be shouldering the burden, because the middle class keeps our society afloat.

[zelmo1234]

I am morally opposed to an income tax (productivity tax). A sales tax is easy to game. Buy used stuff when you can.

But it is really hard to only buy used stuff and those that have any means at all are not going to do it! Also this creates a great used market, meaning your garage sale is worth a lot more!

And that is the best form of recycling as well! We would not toss as much in the landfill

[Green Arrow]

By the way, consumption taxes (sales tax, alcohol tax, tobacco tax, etc.) are the most fair and equitable tax methods and are completely voluntary.

[nic34]

Oh, don't start that crap with me. You know better.

Sorry that was zel's response to you I criticized.

SS and Medicare are a separate payroll tax working people pay.
I'm for raising the cap on that tax. Since every worker is eligible, everyone should pay in.

[zelmo1234]

Zel, that was the Reagan administration when we lost those deductions. :wink:

Yeah, sure we go back to higher marginal rates but we still get the deductions.

Yes Reagan lowered the top rate and Tip O'Neil and the Democrats got rid of tons of deductions, as they should have.

Car interest and credit card interest were 2 I remember

And good because I made low 5 figures last year with a 24% effective tax rate based on a 39% + 3% ACA

And If you take me back to JFK I would have likely paid less than 5% effective!

Now those making15K would have paid about 7% under JFK so almost everyone would have skin in the game as well!

Yes it is possible that even you would pay federal tax under the JFK system

[nic34]

I already pay fed tax zel...:wink:

[zelmo1234]

Well, that great socialist Dwight Eisenhower for one, who had the top tax rate at 91%.

You forgot about the fact that the rich did not pay taxes! back then it was feel good tax rates so politicians could say see we are sticking it to the rich!

He Rockefeller, Morgan and Carnegie wrote the darn code? what would you expect.


It was the only time they worked together, and had McKinley not been assonated, and they did not try and take TEddy out by putting him in the VP spot, it would have gotten worse!

[Green Arrow]

You forgot about the fact that the rich did not pay taxes! back then it was feel good tax rates so politicians could say see we are sticking it to the rich!

He Rockefeller, Morgan and Carnegie wrote the darn code? what would you expect.


It was the only time they worked together, and had McKinley not been assonated, and they did not try and take TEddy out by putting him in the VP spot, it would have gotten worse!

You have any evidence for these claims?

[zelmo1234]

The middle class shouldn't be shouldering the burden, because the middle class keeps our society afloat.

Everyone should be shouldering part of the burden, why should anyone get a free lunch?

[Green Arrow]

Everyone should be shouldering part of the burden, why should anyone get a free lunch?

Who said anything about a free lunch?

[zelmo1234]

You have any evidence for these claims?

http://studygrowknowblog.com/2012/11/16/buying-a-president/

Yes they bought the Presidency! And they got there tax and trust policies through!

It also allowed Morgan to Create General Electric as Westinghouse never worried about capital, though he would have been a great guy to work for!

[zelmo1234]

Sorry that was zel's response to you I criticized.

SS and Medicare are a separate payroll tax working people pay.
I'm for raising the cap on that tax. Since every worker is eligible, everyone should pay in.

But they are terrible. You pay 6.5% of your income which is enough to make a minimum wage earner a millionaire at 67! and instead you get just enough not to starve to death!

And the healthcare system? It is the largest denier of treatment in the country!

[zelmo1234]

Who said anything about a free lunch?

47% of the people today get a free lunch when it comes to federal spending

Not SS/Medicaid but all of the other wonderful programs like roads, and education they are not paying a dime!

[Green Arrow]

http://studygrowknowblog.com/2012/11/16/buying-a-president/

Yes they bought the Presidency! And they got there tax and trust policies through!

It also allowed Morgan to Create General Electric as Westinghouse never worried about capital, though he would have been a great guy to work for!

Did you actually read that article? It says nothing about the tax policies of Eisenhower and his successors. I asked for proof of "the fact that the rich did not pay taxes! back then it was feel good tax rates," and you give me an opinion article from a blog that doesn't even mention taxes once.

[Green Arrow]

47% of the people today get a free lunch when it comes to federal spending

Not SS/Medicaid but all of the other wonderful programs like roads, and education they are not paying a dime!

That's nice, but has nothing to do with what I am saying. I don't advocate for the status quo.

[zelmo1234]

Did you actually read that article? It says nothing about the tax policies of Eisenhower and his successors. I asked for proof of "the fact that the rich did not pay taxes! back then it was feel good tax rates," and you give me an opinion article from a blog that doesn't even mention taxes once.

Sorry misunderstood thought you were talking about them buying the presidency

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/12/what-top-1-really-paid-when-top-tax.html

So give me the deductions and I will take it! but only if the lower brackets are paying what they did back then as well

[Cigar]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/t1.0-9/10426569_10152233195526275_7270341336993536626_n.j pg

[Green Arrow]

That was a terrible leap in logic.

[Cigar]

That was a terrible leap in logic.

Ok ... then are you saying we can still do these things? :wink:

[Peter1469]

can we have the same tax deductions?

[Green Arrow]

Ok ... then are you saying we can still do these things? :wink:

If we budget right, sure.

[Mainecoons]

Using the term "leap" in connection with a Cigar thread makes sense but the word "logic" has no relevancy to his contributions here.

:grin:

[Cigar]

Using the term "leap" in connection with a Cigar thread makes sense but the word "logic" has no relevancy to his contributions here.

:grin:

May as well deny the Facts also :laugh:

[The Xl]

It doesn't really matter what the tax rate is so long as their are loopholes and the money goes to special interests.

[zelmo1234]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/t1.0-9/10426569_10152233195526275_7270341336993536626_n.j pg

When did we defeat communism in the 50's

Are you trying to take credit for What Reagan did now too?

[zelmo1234]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/t1.0-9/10426569_10152233195526275_7270341336993536626_n.j pg

Well I think that we should dissect this one by one

Now that the rich are paying the highest percentage of the federal tax revenue than any time in history?

Or roads and Interstate system are falling apart because Unions and prevailing wage reduces the amount of work that can be done.

Brought to you by your Democrats in Government

We can't put an man on the moon because we have NO space program, but NASA is working on a Muslim outreach! and that is working SOOOOOO well!

Brought to you by your Democrats in Government

Well Communism is back on the rise and Russia is once again expanding there boarders. Even though Reagan Defeated Communism in the 1980's

Brought to you by the biggest pussy to ever occupy the oval office Obama!

Our economy is cripple by Regulations, Green energy mandates, the ACA, the highest corporate tax rate in the world, and the threat of increasing the minimum wage!

Brought to you by you Democrats in Government

Our educations systems spends more than any other system in the world. we don't hold kids accountable, there is no discipline, kids are not allowed to compete as there are no winners and losers any longer. We have social promotions so kids are not held accountable to learn, and educations has been set aside for liberal indoctrination

Brought to you by your Democrats in government, and Jimmy Carter creator of the DOE


If you want these things back???

VOTE THE DEOMCRATS OUT OF OFFICE!

[exotix]

That was back when Big Govt. was a partner and friend with conservatism ... when Jobs, Jobs, Jobs meant * Patriotism* ... then look what happened ...


http://www.quickmeme.com/img/f7/f74160e246d7fe3fd34e099b41f35d15a4ece10086f4bf4248 f02e58a970f402.jpg

[Blackrook]

The economy was stagnant during the 1950's and did not improve until JFK lowered income tax rates.

[Green Arrow]

The economy was stagnant during the 1950's and did not improve until JFK lowered income tax rates.

Source?

[Blackrook]

Source?
I can't find a source. Apparently, history has been rewritten to ignore the stagnant economy in the 1950's. My source is my father, who lived during that decade. He remembers Eisenhower inviting business leaders to golf, trying to get them to "voluntarily" expand their business at a time when businesses were reluctant to do so.

[Green Arrow]

I can't find a source. Apparently, history has been rewritten to ignore the stagnant economy in the 1950's. My source is my father, who lived during that decade. He remembers Eisenhower inviting business leaders to golf, trying to get them to "voluntarily" expand their business at a time when businesses were reluctant to do so.

Well, anecdotal evidence is insufficient.

[Peter1469]

From NPR: (http://www.npr.org/2013/11/12/244772593/jfks-lasting-economic-legacy-lower-tax-rates)


That boom came after Kennedy got Congress to try to stimulate the economy by passing a "liberal" agenda that included:


Increasing the minimum wage.
Expanding unemployment benefits.
Boosting Social Security benefits to encourage workers to retire earlier.
Spending more for highway construction.

But Kennedy also did something that conservatives have been praising ever since: He pushed for much lower tax rates.


In 1962, of New York, Kennedy said he was committed to "an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes." The tax system, mostly designed during World War II, "exerts too heavy a drag on growth in peace time; that it siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power; that it reduces the financial incentives for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking," he said.






Source?

[Blackrook]

Well, anecdotal evidence is insufficient.
That's why it's a big advantage to have the historians write history the way you want it to.

My father remembers much that was officially buried. For example, the United States was the first nation to put a rocket in orbit, not the Soviet Union. My father read about it in a newspaper. But a few days later, there was a cover-up and the American rocket was never spoken of again. So the historians dutifully write the official version, which is that Sputnik was the first rocket in space.

Another "fact" is that no WMD's were found in Iraq. This is a lie, perpetrated by the government, and spread by the media. WMD's were found in Iraq, my secretary knew military men who told her about them, and she told me.

Did Lee Harvey Oswald act alone? That is a ridiculous fantasy. Oswald was a die-hard Communiist who defected to the Soviet Union, then came back. Castro wanted Kennedy dead, because Kennedy was trying to kill Castro. In the dangerous assassination game JFK was playing (he also assassinated the President of South Vietnam), JFK got bit in the ass. He caused his own death by his own stupidity.

[ChoppedLiver]

Four years into his presidency, in 1927, Coolidge reduced taxes to the point where only the top 2% were paying income taxes. Why not go back to that?


What do you do with seniors living in poverty? Go back to soup kitchens?

Maybe a 50 year lifespan is enough after all.


Oh, don't start that crap with me. You know better.


He did you advocated only taxing the top 2% you brought it up, so why is it not fair game?

Because you don't have an answer for it?

You are correct, Zelmo. He ain't got squat to answer to HIS QUESTION he asked in HIS OWN THREAD and then had the idiotic gall to direct other posters reply to the O.P. That's like the old, "LOOK! A rabbit!" dodge of one that is ignorant to his own discussion of an issue.

:cool:

[ChoppedLiver]

Perhaps you should learn the difference between what the "tax rate" and the actual "effective tax rate" is before you ask questions like that.
Also, the high WARTIME tax rate was on the rich that was offset by the gobs and gobs of money the feds. were throwing at them for various wartime production materials and such.

:cool:


Or, I can just ask the question because I'm not concerned with what the effective tax rate is, since nobody ever complains about the ETR but does complain about the plain old tax rate.

By saying you're "not concerned" with the effective tax rate might imply that you actually know what the ETR actually is. And since you know what it is, that would make your OP "question" pretty disingenuous almost on its face in your claim to not care. Not that the premise of your OP is a lie. It's just ignorant of the actual facts and you just don't know any better. Sad.

:cool:

[zelmo1234]

Source?

http://www.multpl.com/us-gdp-inflation-adjusted/table

Do you guys ever get tired of seeing that tax cuts cause economic growth?

Or should I say is there ever going to be any time when you acutely believe the numbers

You can see the Kennedy Tax cuts, the Reagan cuts, the Clinton Cuts and YES the GWB cuts

All increase GDP
All increased revenue
All decreased Unemployment
All increases wages and wealth

They work everytime

[zelmo1234]

I can't find a source. Apparently, history has been rewritten to ignore the stagnant economy in the 1950's. My source is my father, who lived during that decade. He remembers Eisenhower inviting business leaders to golf, trying to get them to "voluntarily" expand their business at a time when businesses were reluctant to do so.

I found one you were correct, when you figure inflation it was a pretty flat decade

[zelmo1234]

Well, anecdotal evidence is insufficient.

I posted figures

Now what