Yes, because lowering them at THOSE rates allowed for workers to continue to do fine. Lowering them far too low as Reagan did, is not the same thing.
Republicans have no answer to this simple chart
- Thread starter Craig234
- Start date
Yes, because lowering them at THOSE rates allowed for workers to continue to do fine. Lowering them far too low as Reagan did, is not the same thing.
cawacko
Well-known member
I beg, please tell me what is ignorant in what I wrote there. I'd honestly love to hear it.
Why don't you just smash your keyboard? You'll say as much useful and save some time. Try learning how it was a 'different time' that says why Republicans did not lower those tax rates. Naw, you won't.
cawacko
Well-known member
You're asking to me answer why Eisenhower and Republicans didn't lower taxes in 1953 & 1954? I have no clue. First you're complaining about tax cuts now you're complaining taxes weren't cut. SMH
When I give you info 19 times and you are allergic to learning any of it, why is #20 worthwhile? Why would I spend a lot of time on such a large list? Want an example - you think the only issue unions faced is globalization, huh? You only mentioned it.
Why, the Republican war on unions never happened.
The larger shift in the growth of power of the wealthy and the owners never happened that had any effect.
I just said it in the post - "There's a larger shift of power to the rich that all contributes to this." that you ignored. You just ignore and then ask for it again.
No, I suggested you go find out, and said you probably won't, and you're proving me right. Then you repeat your lie that I'm 'complaining' taxes weren't cut that I already pointed out is a lie. Why don't you repeat it a third time and ignore this again?
cawacko
Well-known member
What does it have to do with today? Nothing. If you have a point you want to make I'm open to hearing it but it does nothing for the conversation or your chart.
Teflon Don
I'm back baby
You are saying the tax cuts in 1970 are the reason?
Maybe it had something to do with Nixon taking us off of the gold standard and it’s inflationary impact which robbed workers? Probably too deep for you
You really are a moron on steroids. The chart isn't even spelled right.
The moronic argument suggesting that Americans do less well if we have higher tax rates on the rich or corporations is beyond mere stupid.
Inequality in and of itself is moronic argument. Everything on the planet is unequal. The notion that things should be equal has been proven moronic in the collapse of Marxist style societies where the elite of the Marxist polit bureau lived far better than the rest of the people and there were shortages of just about everything.
Just look at Venezuela if you don't believe me. This notion that if every one were paid the same and no one made any profits is the realm of uneducated ignoramuses or dishonest politic apparatchiks who wish to enslave the stupid and gullible.
That's a lie and your chart doesn't support such moronic claims. Did you flunk out of grade school perhaps?
I can hardly wait for you to have an intelligent eruption.
What is factual about the moronic claims of the thread whose link doesn't come close to proving that idiotic claim?
Redistribution schemes are another stupid idea from the ignoramuses on the left. What this requires is the moronic belief that faceless politicians trying to stay elected know better how to spend our wealth than we, the sheeple. That's not just moronic, but terribly dangerous from a liberty perspective.
Another stupid claim; how do they do this? Let's see how brain dead you really are.
Another moronic liberal leftist notion; that they should be the arbiters of need. Priceless
More proof you haven't the slightest clue of what you are emotionally erupting about. The thing that really disrupts markets is Government interventionism.
Wrong again; because when you increase the cost of doing business, you raise the prices of everything thus negating any temporary artificial increase in wages.
The right way to increase wages is for workers to gain higher level skills and education that is in demand. What economic dimwits like you demand would weaken the economy much like Venezuela's.
I am amused that you think arbitrarily raising minimum wages is about demand. Dunce.
This is not true for all corporations or small businesses. But then it begs the question, why is it wrong for them to make profits which get re-invested into the economy creating more jobs and higher wages?
Eight years of Obamunism has done that....but this is already changing with only a year in office for Trump.
During Obamunism the money went to Wall Street and bankers while the fed pumped untold billions into them with their idiotic effort to prop up a failed Obama economy.
This is a flat out lie; but again, I am amused by dullard arguments regarding wage equality and wealth equality; two of the dumbest arguments next to Obama's lie that you could keep your doctors and throwing away trillions on the ACA would lower health care costs.
Why could workers do well with the wealthy paying 70% rather than 40%? The tax money did not go to the workers.
JFK & LBJ lowered the top rate from 91% to 70% (21%) and the bottom rate from 20% to 14% (6%). That means the wealthy got 3 times the cut as lower income (and more in actual dollars).
During the period of that chart the higher tax rates resulted in lower tax revenues as a percent of GDP while spending as a percent o the GDP was lower. Maybe less government spending and taking less revenue out of the economy accounted for the wage increases.
Wrong; it provides gullible voters who keep dishonest and corrupt politicians in office. Obama spent $10 trillion and you idiots still whine about infrastructure.
Healthcare sucks much worse with the ACA.
As for education, based on idiots like you and your nonsense, it is apparent that it too has failed no matter how much money you throw at it.
Corporation don't pay taxes you moron; it is WE the consumers who pay it. More proof of what a failure our public school systems have been.
....and they never paid that much with all the loopholes and deductions in the tax code.
But even if the taxes were raised to 90% without the deductions, it wouldn't provide a penny more to the Government coffers; proof is that raising taxes merely chases capital to other countries and results in lower economic activity and higher poverty rates.
WE DON'T HAVE A REVENUE PROBLEM IDIOTS, WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM.
Wrong; they are becoming the laughing stock of the world and instead of teaching, now merely indoctrinate and graduate idiots. You are exhibit "A".
That's a lie; they are repairing and increasing the size of roads constantly throughout the USA you lying dumbfuck. The problem is not REVENUE, but how they SPEND it.
Taxing the wealthy didn't make us strong. That is a complete lie. Allowing enterprise to flourish with minimal regulations and interference from Government is what made this country great. Now, uneducated lying leftist twits are trying to convince everyone that Government is great and we need to willfully shell out more of our hard earned wealth and become dependents of the state. Stupid.
Teflon Don
I'm back baby
Apparently you nimrods don’t
A) know how to read a chart
And
B) know your history.
Look at your own graph. See when CEO pay really started to spike? Oh yeah, that would be 1992. Who was President and controlled Congress then? Come on sugar tits, you can answer
One of their actions was to limit the amount of CEO pay a company could write off as an expense. You know as a way to soak it to the “rich”
But like all things, it had an unintended consequence. Companies merely changed comp plans and started using more stock options as a means of compensation vs salary.
That is what is driving those numbers. Not tax cuts you dumb fucks
These lessons are free. How you apply them is up to you