Raising taxes is the solution.

[Chris]

Explain to me the boom in the '50s and '60s when tax rates were much higher than they are now

I'll explain it to you since you had the logic exactly backwards.
Hi taxes incentivize business owners and stock owners to keep their money in the business or in the market. If they withdraw the money they pay a heavy tax. This leads to business expansion rather than profit-taking and spending on useless luxury items by the business owner.
Makes sense doesn't it

Let's take this reasoning at face value, all else being equal, as it's said, iow, ignore other factors.

So assume it's true that raising corporate tax rates incentivizes owners to invest untaxed rather than take profits that are taxed.

What is the consequence? Why, lower revenue.

The reasoning is self-defeating.

[zelmo1234]

I just voted. The proposal would raise my property tax approximately $100 a year. I voted against it not because I don't want to pay but because I think it is the wrong vehicle of taxation. Washington needs an income tax. It should be markedly progressive. We should get rid of the sales tax and the state should not be dependent on property tax for anything.
Much of the state is funded by sales taxes which are horribly regressive and hurt the poor. We should be taxing the Rich who can afford to pay.

Why would they not move there business headquarters to another State and move the profits as well as the higher paying White Collar jobs to that state?

Leaving you will less workers and less revenue?

[zelmo1234]

The measure is an attempt to do something about mentally ill homeless people who are a problem. What is your suggestion that they be shot? Maybe we should export them from Seattle to your city. Or maybe we can create the facilities to treat their mental illness and help them get on their way in life.

That was what happened once upon a time, but it is unconstitutional now.

[Chris]

Why would they not move there business headquarters to another State and move the profits as well as the higher paying White Collar jobs to that state?

Leaving you will less workers and less revenue?

Or offshore or overseas?

[zelmo1234]

Or offshore or overseas?

It won't matter they never answer because they know that I am write, and they can look at the numbers you lower taxes revenue goes up. And they don't want to admit that the Rich are paying more than their fair share now.

What they really don't want to talk about is why they are not in the higher income bracket. I get to play a lot now, but for more than 20 years I worked 80+ hours a week every week. when we were starting out, splitting a Value meal at a fast food joint was a night out for us.

They are not willing to put in the time or the effort so they want the state to take it from those that did and give it to them.

[carolina73]

Let's take this reasoning at face value, all else being equal, as it's said, iow, ignore other factors.

So assume it's true that raising corporate tax rates incentivizes owners to invest untaxed rather than take profits that are taxed.

What is the consequence? Why, lower revenue.

The reasoning is self-defeating.

Not to mention that everything was a write off so the equivalent of a 90% tax rate at that time was 37%. Right where the top tax rate is now. The tax code at that time was in volumes.

[carolina73]

It won't matter they never answer because they know that I am write, and they can look at the numbers you lower taxes revenue goes up. And they don't want to admit that the Rich are paying more than their fair share now.

What they really don't want to talk about is why they are not in the higher income bracket. I get to play a lot now, but for more than 20 years I worked 80+ hours a week every week. when we were starting out, splitting a Value meal at a fast food joint was a night out for us.

They are not willing to put in the time or the effort so they want the state to take it from those that did and give it to them.

IT is also class envy. They are more concerned in lowering the lifestyles of the well off then they are increasing their own position.
You see the same thing with the opposition to school choice where they want your kids to be as dumb as their kids.
The entire socialist/Green movement is hell bent on making sure you cannot spend your money by going anywhere or having enough power to run anything.

[Tahuyaman]

It always amazes me that when the Democrats are in office we have a spending problem and when the Republicans are in office there's no spending problem at all and we need to immediately have tax cuts on the wealthy.

saying things like that is proof that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Every single time the POTUS is a Republican, he is held solely responsible for the national debt. Even when Democrats are in the majority in both chambers of the congress.

Every time a Democrat is in office, the Republicans are responsible for the national debt even when they are in the minority in both chambers of the congress.

[Peter1469]

Explain to me the boom in the '50s and '60s when tax rates were much higher than they are now

I'll explain it to you since you had the logic exactly backwards.
Hi taxes incentivize business owners and stock owners to keep their money in the business or in the market. If they withdraw the money they pay a heavy tax. This leads to business expansion rather than profit-taking and spending on useless luxury items by the business owner.
Makes sense doesn't it

During that time there were an awful lot of deductions. Nobody paid those high rates.

[Peter1469]

That is an opinion

Backed up by the data.