Do You Think The Rich Should Be Taxed More?

PoliTalker said:
Hello Quetzalcoatl,



Good point about the USA being largely untouched by infrastructure damage (not completely - don't forget Pearl Harbor) and that was a huge factor in our success of the 50's, but at the same time we had Tremendous debt to pay off from WWII. We also helped rebuild Europe, forking over $13 billion during 4 years of the Marshall Plan. We did all of that, paid for the GI Bill, the middle class was stronger than ever, - and - the rich still earned 10-20 times the income of the middle, and they lived in luxury. It's not like the high taxes of that age held capitalism back. The biggest difference was that wealth was distributed more equitably than it is now.
Click to expand...

The only thing tremendous was our military spending in peace time. Cut back on that by 75% and let me know how much we need to tax people first.
 
you don't make policy

the republican party has stabbed itself with lies and racism


the world will be more liberal now


you silly libertarians have lost
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Quetzalcoatl,



Good point about the USA being largely untouched by infrastructure damage (not completely - don't forget Pearl Harbor) and that was a huge factor in our success of the 50's, but at the same time we had Tremendous debt to pay off from WWII. We also helped rebuild Europe, forking over $13 billion during 4 years of the Marshall Plan. We did all of that, paid for the GI Bill, the middle class was stronger than ever, - and - the rich still earned 10-20 times the income of the middle, and they lived in luxury. It's not like the high taxes of that age held capitalism back. The biggest difference was that wealth was distributed more equitably than it is now.
Click to expand...

The marginal tax rate was much higher but not the effective tax rate. And, the total revenue as a percent of GDP was less than the lower tax rates of recent years. Both revenue and spending as a percent of GDP was lower in the 50's-60's.
 
Hello and greetings Shallon Peterson,

Shallon Peterson said:
"Tax the rich,till there are no rich no more"!
Click to expand...

Great song, but hardly applicable to the conversation. We are nowhere near that situation.

How about we just set the top tax rate at 50% and begin paying down the debt? Wouldn't that be a good thing?

This rate would only affect the top 1% of earners. The rest could remain as is.
 
OK, Obama was presented with a near depression to fight off after Bush. Obama would not have had to do that if the Repubs were capable politicians. Obama should have nationalized some banks after the right wing,Republican crash. But he did not have the nerve.
 
Nordberg said:
OK, Obama was presented with a near depression to fight off after Bush. Obama would not have had to do that if the Repubs were capable politicians. Obama should have nationalized some banks after the right wing,Republican crash. But he did not have the nerve.
Click to expand...

Nor the authority
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello and greetings Shallon Peterson,



Great song, but hardly applicable to the conversation. We are nowhere near that situation.

How about we just set the top tax rate at 50% and begin paying down the debt? Wouldn't that be a good thing?

This rate would only affect the top 1% of earners. The rest could remain as is.
Click to expand...

We never will pay off the debt.
 
Nordberg said:
OK, Obama was presented with a near depression to fight off after Bush. Obama would not have had to do that if the Repubs were capable politicians. Obama should have nationalized some banks after the right wing,Republican crash. But he did not have the nerve.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be socialism?
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello and greetings Shallon Peterson,



Great song, but hardly applicable to the conversation. We are nowhere near that situation.

How about we just set the top tax rate at 50% and begin paying down the debt? Wouldn't that be a good thing?

This rate would only affect the top 1% of earners. The rest could remain as is.
Click to expand...

A 50% tax rate would not even eliminate the deficit much less start paying down the debt.
 
Frank Apisa said:
I think people should vote for whomever they choose.

But anyone who votes expecting money to "trickle down" because of the favorite American conservative fantasy...is kidding him/herself.
Click to expand...

Republicans never suggested the money would "trickle down." Trickle down was a derogatory term used by Democrats to oppose the tax cuts. Under higher taxes the money did not trickle down to more people, either. It went to the government.
 
Flash said:
Republicans never suggested the money would "trickle down." Trickle down was a derogatory term used by Democrats to oppose the tax cuts. Under higher taxes the money did not trickle down to more people, either. It went to the government.
Click to expand...

As I said, "...anyone who votes expecting money to "trickle down" because of the favorite American conservative fantasy...is kidding him/herself."

Allow me to repeat it:

Anyone who votes expecting money to "trickle down" because of the favorite American conservative fantasy...is kidding him/herself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top