You poor, sad and pathetic lunatic; you made the same moronic claims when Obama was elected. STFU you ignorant buffoon. We get it; you're mentally retarded.
An idea for bipartisan tax reform
- Thread starter Oneuli
- Start date
You poor, sad and pathetic lunatic; you made the same moronic claims when Obama was elected. STFU you ignorant buffoon. We get it; you're mentally retarded.
For those who want to see REAL tax reform that will benefit Americans, businesses and the economy, not to mention pour more revenue into Government coffers; the FAIR TAX is that reform.
If you want to learn more or debate it, see....https://fairtax.org/about/how-fairtax-works
If you want to learn more or debate it, see....https://fairtax.org/about/how-fairtax-works
The historical brackets can be found here:
https://files.taxfoundation.org/legacy/docs/fed_individual_rate_history_nominal.pdf
What's interesting is not just how high the top marginal rate was during our economic golden age, but also how high the rates were even on the middle class. For example, in 1963, the top bracket of families earning between $32,000 and $36,000 was 50%. That's about $266,000 in today's money -- not exactly wealthy. Back then, you paid your top dollar at 22% starting at just $4,000 in family income, which is just around $33,000 today. So even the lower-middle-class was paying at that level. By comparison, these days you'd have to earn $77,401 before you started paying 22%.
countryboy
Verified User
Tell us what the effective tax rate was at that time, compared to today. How many times does this shit need to be explained to brain dead libs?
countryboy
Verified User
Yes, those were the marginal rates. Now tell us what the effective rates were, compared to today.
I agree with the first statement, but not the second. The GOP is just too useful to the very rich for them to allow it to die. The oligarchy will keep plowing their money into the task of promoting Republicans and smearing Democrats, to make sure the GOP remains viable. Even now, after all that happened in the prior three years ought to have turned the GOP into a fringe party, they still manage to get about 40% of the support. The combination of low-information bigots in the electorate, and lots of money always on tap for Republican politicians, keeps them in play. Generally, the pattern is when people have been freshly reminded of how bad Republicans are, they suffer a setback, but not usually a bad enough one for systemic changes (e.g., 1992, 2008, and 2018). Then, as memory of just how awful the GOP can be with power fades, they make a come-back (e.g., 1994, 2010, 2016).
I'm not a huge fan of the right-wing tendency to think that making an argument consists of handing out assignments.... as in: yeah, but tell us what the lowest marginal rate was!..... yeah, but how about effective rates?! If you have an argument to make with regard to effective rates, shouldn't you present the data, rather than expecting others to do it for you?
Myth 1: Raising taxes on the rich will close budget deficits.
Truth: Increasing the progressivity of the income tax code by raising the top two rates will not close the deficit. In fact, it will lead to more revenue volatility, which will lead to larger future deficits.
Myth 2: The rich do not pay their fair share.
Truth: The top 20 percent of income earners pay almost all federal taxes.
Myth 3: The income tax code favors the rich and well-connected.
Truth: The bottom 50 percent of income earners pay almost no income taxes and the poor and middle-income earners benefit greatly from the tax code.
Myth 4: It is all right to raise tax rates on the rich-- they can afford it.
Truth: Just because someone can afford to pay higher taxes does not mean he should be forced to do so.
Myth 5: Higher tax rates in the 1990s did not hurt economic growth, so it is all right to raise them to those levels again.
Truth: High tax rates in the 1990s were a contributing factor to the 2001 recession and returning to those rates will damage the already severely weakened economy.
Myth 6: The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts did not generate strong economic growth.
Truth: The tax cuts generated strong economic growth.
Myth 7: Raising the top two income tax rates will not negatively impact small businesses because only 2 percent of them pay rates at that level.
Truth: Raising the top two income tax rates will negatively impact almost three-fourths of all economic activity created by small businesses.
Conclusion
The many arguments used by proponents of higher taxes ignore basic economic facts and distort the positive benefits of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.
The truth is that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts were a major factor behind robust economic growth between 2003 and 2007. Undoing those tax cuts now for any taxpayers would inflict unnecessary damage to a struggling economy and needlessly cost many more Americans their jobs.
Adding additional higher surtaxes on high earners to fund a government takeover of the health care system would only do more damage to the economy and lead to more lost jobs and lower economic growth.
Instead of imposing these economy-injuring tax hikes, Congress should close budget deficits and spur economic growth by:
Immediately cutting spending, including reforming the Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid entitlement programs, in order to get long-term budget deficits under control;[20]
Make the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent for all taxpayers; and
Further cut tax rates on workers and investors.[21]
Raising taxes on the rich will hurt the economy at a time when the U.S. can least afford further damage.
https://www.heritage.org/taxes/report/seven-myths-about-taxing-the-rich
Truth: Increasing the progressivity of the income tax code by raising the top two rates will not close the deficit. In fact, it will lead to more revenue volatility, which will lead to larger future deficits.
Myth 2: The rich do not pay their fair share.
Truth: The top 20 percent of income earners pay almost all federal taxes.
Myth 3: The income tax code favors the rich and well-connected.
Truth: The bottom 50 percent of income earners pay almost no income taxes and the poor and middle-income earners benefit greatly from the tax code.
Myth 4: It is all right to raise tax rates on the rich-- they can afford it.
Truth: Just because someone can afford to pay higher taxes does not mean he should be forced to do so.
Myth 5: Higher tax rates in the 1990s did not hurt economic growth, so it is all right to raise them to those levels again.
Truth: High tax rates in the 1990s were a contributing factor to the 2001 recession and returning to those rates will damage the already severely weakened economy.
Myth 6: The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts did not generate strong economic growth.
Truth: The tax cuts generated strong economic growth.
Myth 7: Raising the top two income tax rates will not negatively impact small businesses because only 2 percent of them pay rates at that level.
Truth: Raising the top two income tax rates will negatively impact almost three-fourths of all economic activity created by small businesses.
Conclusion
The many arguments used by proponents of higher taxes ignore basic economic facts and distort the positive benefits of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.
The truth is that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts were a major factor behind robust economic growth between 2003 and 2007. Undoing those tax cuts now for any taxpayers would inflict unnecessary damage to a struggling economy and needlessly cost many more Americans their jobs.
Adding additional higher surtaxes on high earners to fund a government takeover of the health care system would only do more damage to the economy and lead to more lost jobs and lower economic growth.
Instead of imposing these economy-injuring tax hikes, Congress should close budget deficits and spur economic growth by:
Immediately cutting spending, including reforming the Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid entitlement programs, in order to get long-term budget deficits under control;[20]
Make the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent for all taxpayers; and
Further cut tax rates on workers and investors.[21]
Raising taxes on the rich will hurt the economy at a time when the U.S. can least afford further damage.
https://www.heritage.org/taxes/report/seven-myths-about-taxing-the-rich
Why; because you say so??? Dumb.
This statement is so dumb, even a moron like you should be able to see the conundrum. How can the people actually paying the lions share of taxes be stealing taxes? Moron.
Yep, in liberal dumbfuck land where you wallow, why work together?
It's THEIR money you moron. It doesn't belong to the Government and certainly not to you. They pay the LIONS share. Maybe losers like you should step up and carry some of the load?
If the poor are going to live in society, they need to pay their fair share and nothing isn't a fair share.
evince
Truthmatters
If the tool is broken they will just get another tool
the tool is broken
republican will mean cheating and evil
a name is a name
they will reform under something else that can be a useful tool
But that tool will take time to pay off
In the meantime we have a HUGE chance to do wonderful things for this nation
evince
Truthmatters
dear fucking idiot
that plan has NEVER worked every fucking time you idiots try it
fuck you very much
I think anyone who does productive labor is ultimately contributing to society in one way or another. For example, the working poor, although they may not pay income taxes, will pay payroll taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, etc., as well as indirectly paying tariffs. Most of the working poor also work for others, rather than themselves, and so they contribute to profits that someone else winds up paying taxes on. In addition, they can contribute in the form of jury duty, voting, military or other public-service jobs, etc.
cawacko
Well-known member
Why not a flat tax where we eliminate all write-offs? Otherwise we will continue to have the government use the tax code to "encourage" behavior they want.
But ultimately there will never be a real bi-partisan effort because it's not possible. The adage "paying your fair share" is a great one because no what the rich pay it will never be enough.
But ultimately there will never be a real bi-partisan effort because it's not possible. The adage "paying your fair share" is a great one because no what the rich pay it will never be enough.
I'm in favor of closing corporate loopholes, but I don't see lowering overall taxation as a good path. In fact, I'd say we'd almost surely be better off with higher overall taxes. If you look at the leading societies of the world, in terms of quality of life, they tend to have higher taxes than the US. In wealthy nations, tax revenues range between about 25% and 50% of GDP, and the US is at the low end of that range. That suggests there's more room for us to raise our taxes than to lower them, while preserving a good quality of life. After all, we have lots of examples of countries here in the real world that have higher effective taxes than us and a good quality of life, and almost no examples of countries with lower effective taxes and a good quality of life.
The same is true when it comes to the question of spending cuts. Sure, there are some areas where I think all reasonable people can agree we spend an absurd amount of money. Our military budget is vastly more than all our potential adversaries combined. We could save a whole lot there. We also blow a lot of money on the prison-industrial complex. And the whole "security state" apparatus, from theatrical bag-checking, to Big Brother surveillance programs, to pointless border barriers, is wasteful, and could be trimmed up a great deal. But, even with all that waste, our total spending is relatively low as a share of GDP compared to what's typical for wealthy nations. That suggests we probably have more room to increase it without hurting quality of life, whereas if we cut it down to still more spartan levels, we could quickly see diminishing returns.
We'll see. The closest approximation we have for that kind of change was the period between 1933 and 1951 when the GOP was effectively defanged and we did a lot of wonderful things for the nation. But think what was needed to bring about that kind of elevation of political consciousness in this country. That generation that turned its back on the GOP only did so after seeing an utter failure of Republican leadership that puts the current situation in the shade. The three Republican administration that led to the Great Depression gave us widespread crushing poverty, bread-lines, Hoovervilles, etc. The 2008 catastrophe was a lesser version of that, and it wasn't even close to enough to render the GOP inoperative for a generation. I don't imagine Trump's going to do it.
evince
Truthmatters
once your idiot party dies from all the stabbing you guys do of it
we wont need your brain dead voting base to pass anything