Got tired of hearing this obvious misrepresentation from Libtards

[texan]

So I read through several things looking for a reasonable explanation on the common comment that "duh after WW2 the rich paid 90% tax" Duh I am a lying liberal......NFW!.....

1. Okay number one nobody would put up with this tax plan, nobody. So on its face you know its really being misrepresented and being used out of context, common sense should tell you that for sure........

2. This link is the best explanation and quickest read to understand this misrepresentation:

http://almostclassical.blogspot.com/2011/03/90-tax-rate-myth.html?m=1

3. IMO it was a pro business idea. Basically all the power was put into the hands of the rich which were also pro business. They could write everything off so they spent like a person gone mad, why wouldn't you......

4. If the dems want to go back to this I think it would be awesome.

5. The comment is technically correct but completely misleading.....................Maybe we could make this change with a pen and a phone executive order. I am with you Mr. President do it!!!! Make the tax code like it was back then and raise the tax rate to 90% you bunch of misleading quacks!

NOBODY LIBERAL OR REPUBLICAN is gonna let you rob them NOBODY!

Here is an example, if I go on a business trip take my family and instead of spending and writing off $1K I write off $5K cause if I don't I never see it again because it was taken from me in taxes......You are damn right I am spending. Talk about a stimulus plan. Yes the rich would pour money onto the economy. Let's do it!

[silvereyes]

Libtards, hunh? I can see that you are wanting to flame and troll.

Sucka!

[Common]

Texan is raging again over me, I think he has a gay crush on me.

Dear Texan: Im not available

[Common]

So I read through several things looking for a reasonable explanation on the common comment that "duh after WW2 the rich paid 90% tax" Duh I am a lying liberal......NFW!.....

1. Okay number one nobody would put up with this tax plan, nobody. So on its face you know its really being misrepresented and being used out of context, common sense should tell you that for sure........

2. This link is the best explanation and quickest read to understand this misrepresentation:

http://almostclassical.blogspot.com/2011/03/90-tax-rate-myth.html?m=1

3. IMO it was a pro business idea. Basically all the power was put into the hands of the rich which were also pro business. They could write everything off so they spent like a person gone mad, why wouldn't you......

4. If the dems want to go back to this I think it would be awesome.

5. The comment is technically correct but completely misleading.....................Maybe we could make this change with a pen and a phone executive order. I am with you Mr. President do it!!!! Make the tax code like it was back then and raise the tax rate to 90% you bunch of misleading quacks!

NOBODY LIBERAL OR REPUBLICAN is gonna let you rob them NOBODY!

Here is an example, if I go on a business trip take my family and instead of spending and writing off $1K I write off $5K cause if I don't I never see it again because it was taken from me in taxes......You are damn right I am spending. Talk about a stimulus plan. Yes the rich would pour money onto the economy. Let's do it!

Youre wrong as usual you and ransom bat zero on this forum :)

[Cigar]

So I read through several things looking for a reasonable explanation on the common comment that "duh after WW2 the rich paid 90% tax" Duh I am a lying liberal......NFW!.....

1. Okay number one nobody would put up with this tax plan, nobody. So on its face you know its really being misrepresented and being used out of context, common sense should tell you that for sure........

2. This link is the best explanation and quickest read to understand this misrepresentation:

http://almostclassical.blogspot.com/2011/03/90-tax-rate-myth.html?m=1

3. IMO it was a pro business idea. Basically all the power was put into the hands of the rich which were also pro business. They could write everything off so they spent like a person gone mad, why wouldn't you......

4. If the dems want to go back to this I think it would be awesome.

5. The comment is technically correct but completely misleading.....................Maybe we could make this change with a pen and a phone executive order. I am with you Mr. President do it!!!! Make the tax code like it was back then and raise the tax rate to 90% you bunch of misleading quacks!

NOBODY LIBERAL OR REPUBLICAN is gonna let you rob them NOBODY!

Here is an example, if I go on a business trip take my family and instead of spending and writing off $1K I write off $5K cause if I don't I never see it again because it was taken from me in taxes......You are $#@! right I am spending. Talk about a stimulus plan. Yes the rich would pour money onto the economy. Let's do it!

Bull Shit, The RePugs didn't have a problem with these Taxs when Lord Reagan was the Pres.

[Peter1469]

Nobody paid those rates. There were deductions out the ass.

[silvereyes]

I bet that hurt. :)

[Howey]

Nobody paid those rates. There were deductions out the ass.

PETER! STOP IT!

Yes, the rich paid those rates. They weren't lowered until Kennedy lowered them. But...we're talking the marginal rates.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/may/02/hillary-clinton/rates-were-a-lot-higher-back-in-the-day/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4S5nM8BjwM

[Peter1469]

That is what marginal rate means.

Nobody paid 90% in taxes. There were a crap load of deductions.

If a tax man told me I owed him 90% of what I earned I would string him up from the nearest tree and gut him while he strangled to death.


PETER! STOP IT!

Yes, the rich paid those rates. They weren't lowered until Kennedy lowered them. But...we're talking the marginal rates.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/may/02/hillary-clinton/rates-were-a-lot-higher-back-in-the-day/

[Common]

Nobody paid those rates. There were deductions out the ass.

Many pay ZERO NOTHING nada zilch

[Boris The Animal]

If the Brain Dead Communists AKA DemocRATS ever get their way, there would be no rich people. All wealth would be seized by the all beneficent State.

[Captain Obvious]

If the Brain Dead Communists AKA DemocRATS ever get their way, there would be no rich people. All wealth would be seized by the all beneficent State.

... says the guy in the lower income bracket.

Keep fucking that chicken, Gomer.

[Boris The Animal]

... says the guy in the lower income bracket.

Keep $#@!ing that chicken, Gomer.
Ask me if I give a flying fuck. It is nobody's frigging business who makes what in this country.

[TrixWitch]

The only smart thing this Luddite's said thus far. He needs to keep more of his money for ketchup spaghetti and smokes.

[texan]

Youre wrong as usual you and ransom bat zero on this forum :)


And you have no idea what you are talking about as usual like your twin bro Cee'Gar.............I posted facts, but I understand you don't accept facts as a libtard.

[texan]

PETER! STOP IT!

Yes, the rich paid those rates. They weren't lowered until Kennedy lowered them. But...we're talking the marginal rates.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/may/02/hillary-clinton/rates-were-a-lot-higher-back-in-the-day/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4S5nM8BjwM


Seriously, can you not read with comprehension? Jesus! Snicker, how dumb are you libtards?


Yes the people that ran the country and owned the gov. forked over 90%...................WTF really? LOL!!!!


READ & RESEARCH AND EVEN BETTER APPLY SOME COMMON SENSE LIBTARD.

[Common]

Seriously, can you not read with comprehension? Jesus! Snicker, how dumb are you libtards?


Yes the people that ran the country and owned the gov. forked over 90%...................WTF really? LOL!!!!


READ & RESEARCH AND EVEN BETTER APPLY SOME COMMON SENSE LIBTARD.

I dont blame you for what you are, texans are born in bunched panties

[nic34]

That is what marginal rate means.

Nobody paid 90% in taxes. There were a crap load of deductions.

If a tax man told me I owed him 90% of what I earned I would string him up from the nearest tree and gut him while he strangled to death.

Texan's OP said
"duh after WW2 the rich paid 90% tax"

As in the RICH paid 90%, not everybody and not on every penny.

[nic34]

Seriously, can you not read with comprehension? Jesus! Snicker, how dumb are you libtards?


Yes the people that ran the country and owned the gov. forked over 90%...................WTF really? LOL!!!!


READ & RESEARCH AND EVEN BETTER APPLY SOME COMMON SENSE LIBTARD.


Good idea, why don't you research, instead of the 3rd grader style name calling.

[PolWatch]

Good idea, why don't you research, instead of the 3rd grader style name calling.

oh dear! you mean libtard or repuker is not the ultimate in political commentary?

[Captain Obvious]

Good idea, why don't you research, instead of the 3rd grader style name calling.

Be thankful that some people use this terminology, it makes it easier for us to determine who we need to disregard.

[nic34]

Some more info:

The argument that high marginal tax rates will discourage economic growth strikes me as pretty compelling. I see the logic of it. There is this nagging problem, though. We’ve just had a long period of historically low marginal tax rates, high unemployment and terrible returns for ordinary investors. So I don’t really find it shocking that Thomas Hungerford, an economist for the Congressional Research Service concluded in a report (http://graphics8.nytimes.com/news/business/0915taxesandeconomy.pdf) that changes in the top marginal rate are uncorrelated with economic growth, although they are correlated with concentration of income at the top.


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.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2012/11/28/crs-refuses-to-disclose-who-requested-withdrawal-of-report-on-marginal-rates/

[nic34]

In other words...... the wealthy with the help of republican sponsored (Reagan) legislation.... have been for over a half century, doing whatever it takes to increase the size of their economic pie and control over the government. :wink:

[Peter1469]

deductions
Texan's OP said

As in the RICH paid 90%, not everybody and not on every penny.

[Peter1469]

Take 100% of the money of the top 1% and run our current spending for about 8 months,

What next genius?

Taxes are not the problem, spending is.


Some more info:

The argument that high marginal tax rates will discourage economic growth strikes me as pretty compelling. I see the logic of it. There is this nagging problem, though. We’ve just had a long period of historically low marginal tax rates, high unemployment and terrible returns for ordinary investors. So I don’t really find it shocking that Thomas Hungerford, an economist for the Congressional Research Service concluded in a report (http://graphics8.nytimes.com/news/business/0915taxesandeconomy.pdf) that changes in the top marginal rate are uncorrelated with economic growth, although they are correlated with concentration of income at the top.


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.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2012/11/28/crs-refuses-to-disclose-who-requested-withdrawal-of-report-on-marginal-rates/

[silvereyes]

... says the guy in the lower income bracket.

Keep fucking that chicken, Gomer.

I wonder when boris season in his neck of the backwoods starts?

[Howey]

oh dear! you mean libtard or repuker is not the ultimate in political commentary?

lol...I just had a vision of Boris holding a club dragging his woman around by her hair and Tex yelling yee haw!

[Mac-7]

... says the guy in the lower income bracket.

Keep $#@!ing that chicken, Gomer.

No, libs often fantasize about taking wealth away from rich people.

Its their not so secret dream.

[Captain Obvious]

No, libs often fantasize about taking wealth away from rich people.

Its their not so secret dream.

And there's no fantasizing with you kissing the rich guy's ass.

There's a reason why at any point in time in history, at any location on the planet, there's a reason why the vast minority of privileged controlled the vast majority of power and wealth and it's because of little Eichmann's like you who serve it up on a platter to them with a smile and jizz on your chin.

Keep fucking that chicken, Gomer - the establishment needs you to do carry your weight and more.