the top tax rate from 1940-1970 was 80% or above

[truthmatters]

http://visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2011/04/14/top-marginal-tax-rates-1916-2010



those were good economic years and we won a big war with them

[KC]

During those years, most people in high income tax breaks paid a much lower effective tax rate, around 50%

[truthmatters]

guess what they pay now?

way less than 50%

[truthmatters]

Now how can the right claim raising the top tax bracket will ruin this country when history proves their ideas are historically false?


time for your party to stop lying to itself.

[truthmatters]

Any of you cons want to make a case for how horrible the 1950s were?

[KC]

Meanwhile, the percent of revenue the government takes in as a percent of GDP is the same. It's stayed roughly around 18% no matter what the top rates are, except now the government takes in way more revenue than it did back then, even when you control for population growth and inflation. If we want more revenue, we should try to create economic growth so that government is taking a slice from a much bigger pie, not just levy more taxes.

[truthmatters]

We should do what has been proven to work.

That is having a reasonable tax on the top bracket instead of paying for the infrastructure on the backs of the VERY consumers we need to get spending.


facts are facts.

What the right claims is going to create disaster has NEVER created the disaster they claim it will.

It created the oposite of disaster.

FACTS are FACTS

[KC]

I think this video summarizes things very well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pES9C7fX_Co&feature=relmfu

[Peter1469]

http://visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2011/04/14/top-marginal-tax-rates-1916-2010



those were good economic years and we won a big war with them

Nobody paid those rates. Loopholes and deductions. The rich pay more now than ever -- of course it is because there are a lot more rich. You can make more in tax revenue by taking less from more.

Something you libtards don't understand.

[Calypso Jones]

http://visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2011/04/14/top-marginal-tax-rates-1916-2010

those were good economic years and we won a big war with them

Why do you feel it necessary to continue to defend what the American public has accepted as reality? Does this victory lie that uneasy on your head? You can stop now. This is the new America. and soon. very soon, your life will change like the rest of ours is going to change too.

[Calypso Jones]

And let me correct you. America did not win WWII with taxes. We won it because the fight was right, Americans were patriotic...even hollywood, and Americans did as much as a civilian population could do on the home front to support our military overseas.

[Chris]

Facts are facts, matters, but to go from what is to what ought to be requires justification.

You ask "Now how can the right claim raising the top tax bracket will ruin this country when history proves their ideas are historically false?" That assumes raising taxes on the rich won't harm the country. How do you justify that as opposed to a counter assumption?

Your argument is based on historicism, belief the past repeats itself. But the political and economic environment is different, the past never repeats itself. So your argument lacks justification for your assumed conclusion.

ποταμοῖσι τοῖσιν αὐτοῖσιν ἐμϐαίνουσιν, ἕτερα καὶ ἕτερα ὕδατα ἐπιρρεῖ. (Ever-newer waters flow on those who step into the same rivers.)
~Heraclitus of Ephesus

[KC]

And let me correct you. America did not win WWII with taxes. We won it because the fight was right, Americans were patriotic...even hollywood, and Americans did as much as a civilian population could do on the home front to support our military overseas.

Not to mention our Soviet friends did most of the grunt work.

[truthmatters]

without the taxes we could NOT have built the machinery we were SO GOOD at that helped save the world.

Yes Rosie the riveter did help win the war.

[truthmatters]

http://visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2011/04/14/top-marginal-tax-rates-1916-2010



those were good economic years and we won a big war with them

this is the real history and will never be rewritten for the sake of the tax cut religion

[Peter1469]

JFK cut taxes and increased tax revenue.

[truthmatters]

yes its a tool we can use to effect things.

can you tell us what he reduced the top tax rate to?

[truthmatters]

http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html


guess what you were wrong top tax bracket under kennedy was 90%

[truthmatters]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy


John Fitzgerald "Jack" Kennedy http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Loudspeaker.svg/11px-Loudspeaker.svg.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/File:John_f_kennedy.ogg) pronunciation (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/John_f_kennedy.ogg) (help (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/Wikipedia:Media_help)·info (http://thepoliticalforums.com/wiki/File:John_f_kennedy.ogg)) (May 29, 1917 – November 22, 1963),

[truthmatters]

1954-63

20

4,000

5 (http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html#_edn5) 91

400,000



http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html

[truthmatters]

JFK cut taxes and increased tax revenue.



will you alter your statement due to the facts?

[truthmatters]

why is in cons never never never admitt when they are wrong?

[Captain Obvious]

1954-63
20
4,000
5 (http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html#_edn5) 91
400,000


http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html

Please refrain from disrupting the thread with continuous nonsensical posts

[truthmatters]

That is a post of the chart numbers during kennedy.


The poster was wrong when he said the kennedy taxes were cut from 90%

[truthmatters]

why did you think it needed to be called senseless?

[truthmatters]

I will note that the poster I proved wrong refuses to admitt he was wrong

[Peter1469]

JFK cut the top marginal tax rates from 90% to 70% and increased tax revenue by 62%.

[Kizzume]

JFK cut the top marginal tax rates from 90% to 70% and increased tax revenue by 62%.

Yes, but there's a point when cutting taxes no longer increases revenue. Look at those numbers. If we lowered them to, let's say, 10%, tax revenue would decrease by a tenfold.

[Peter1469]

Yes, but there's a point when cutting taxes no longer increases revenue. Look at those numbers. If we lowered them to, let's say, 10%, tax revenue would decrease by a tenfold.

Both I and Art Laffer agree.

[Chris]

That is a post of the chart numbers during kennedy.


The poster was wrong when he said the kennedy taxes were cut from 90%


why did you think it needed to be called senseless?


I will note that the poster I proved wrong refuses to admitt he was wrong

Do you think anyone knows what you're babbling about let alone who you're babbling to? Try using the [Reply with Quote] button.

[Peter1469]

Chris, save your breath.

[truthmatters]

JFK cut the top marginal tax rates from 90% to 70% and increased tax revenue by 62%.


documentation please?


He died before they were implimented?

make clear your claim.

He was DEAD when they were lowered.


can you go get the legislation that shows he was the one who generated the bill to cut those taxes?


Now why wont you comment on the meat of the thread which is that some of out most prosperous years were with top tax rates at the 80% level.


raising it a little bit will NOT cause disaster as the right claims.

History shows NOTHING to support such crazy talk.

[Peter1469]

documentation please?


He died before they were implimented?

make clear your claim.

He was DEAD when they were lowered.


can you go get the legislation that shows he was the one who generated the bill to cut those taxes?


Now why wont you comment on the meat of the thread which is that some of out most prosperous years were with top tax rates at the 80% level.


raising it a little bit will NOT cause disaster as the right claims.

History shows NOTHING to support such crazy talk.

If we had a strong economy, it could support tax increases. We do not have a strong economy. It is on the verge of a serious correction. You are focused on static accounting models like the CBO. They do it because it is the law in their case; why do you?

[Peter1469]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmHdqWPB_S8

JFK is right in general; wrong with key specifics.

[hanger4]

If we had a strong economy, it could support tax increases. We do not have a strong economy. It is on the verge of a serious correction. You are focused on static accounting models like the CBO. They do it because it is the law in their case; why do you?

You really believe truthy knows the difference or even the types/kind of accounting methods ??

[Peter1469]

You really believe truthy knows the difference or even the types/kind of accounting methods ??

Absolutely not. I think she has a solid bottom average IQ. 90 is generous.