In 1954, our progressive tax rate was from 14% to 91%. 1954? That's when Eisenhower was president. The Dems proceeded to cut taxes and so did the Republicans. Under both Democrats and Republicans, regardless of tax rates, we've had times with good economies and times with bad economies.

The special thing that Reagan did is he increased deficit spending so much and he cut taxes for the wealthy so much that it made it more difficult to cut taxes for the middle class.

The Republicans have successfully convinced many people to favor a socialist mentality where everyone pays roughly the same thing (so those in power -- in our country, the rich -- make out). They don't want to subject tax policy to market forces, wherein taxes on the wealthy could climb until it had a detrimental effect on the economy.

They've further convinced people that there's massive waste. There may well be massive waste, but normally when we see pork barrel numbers they're no more than say $20 billion or roughly $100/person. There may be things we can cut -- the military, social services, infrastructure, etc., but those programs have very powerful constituencies so cutting them dramatically is unrealistic.

The only way to reduce the income tax burden on the middle class (and poor) is to raise taxes on the wealthy. The good news, for those of you who have special place in your heart for the very wealthy, is that if we raise their taxes too much we may be forced to lower them again at a later point.

I think by raising taxes on the wealthy, providing tax cuts to the poor and middle class and tax incentives for them to invest in their retirement, we can do the greatest good. Further, we can set up charities to help the very wealthy in the event they are having difficulty making monthly payments on their Ferraris.

Tax links (Wikipedia):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...e_Code_of_1954
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_..._United_States

Economic performance link (Forbes):
http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/20/cx_...nts_print.html

Patters you assume the poor are poor mostly due to some unforeseen circumstance. The poor are mainly poor because they choose to be. How else can you explain people without jobs, when everyday unskill laborers who don't even speak English get jobs paying between 8-14 dollars an hour. They do not work, they reamin uneducated in a country that provides free education.

No matter how you try to redistribute the wealth, it will never work, because the rich are rich because (Paris Hilton and Ted Kennedy aside) they worked for it. and vice versa.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

FreeTed, of course there are lazy bums, and I'm not especially concerned about them, but isn't it obvious that there's no correlation between hard work and pay? Sure, some people work really hard and truly earn every penny. Some of them get rich, some don't. On the hand, some people are really lazy, and work as little as possible. Some are rich, some aren't. There's no natural fairness in our economic system.

I'm not looking to redistribute wealth. I'm looking for a tax policy that serves the greater good. Regardless of tax policy, it redistributes wealth (unless you favor a policy where we all pay the exact same $ amount).

My fellow americans,

unless you are like me, ULTRA rich, you are not getting tax cuts...you are getting tax credits...

Those of you who love the republicans (aka my b!tchez) because you think they cut your taxes make me laugh ..... Listen .... The guys and I crack up after a good Polo match while spitting caviar for distance about how much easier it is to make a 3 million dollar contribution, than to be taxed 5 million.

Oh....then we get such a laugh about moving out 'offices' offshore to the islands, so the United States sees less of my revenue. But wait...it gets even funnier.....

There are only two kinds of people that actually benefit from this....Me and the politician.....HA!...isn't that a gas? You people vote them into office.

Keep voting republican! Keep the dream of becoming an ELITE alive, thats what fuels this whole thing. You!

See you all in the hamptons!
Hoity Toity Diver

That's life dude. Do you think Paris Hilton, or Tom Cruise deserve to be millionare's? I work harder in a day than they do in a lifetime. I don't want to steal, or take their money from them. If you want to give your hard earned cash to someone, go ahead, just don't take mine too. We already give the poor enough. The more you give them, the less they do for themselves. I see it everyday. The people in the system think they deserve everything they get, and have no inclination to improve their condition on their own. Matter of fact, most work less because they realize it behooves their situation. Some people truly do need it. I have some elderly tenants, one with Parkinson's desease, another that is crippled. Those people fine, but the mother, and 26 year old male son, who pay $79 for a two bedroom, don't deserve didly! The taxpayer paid for her to have a gastric bypass surgery, and all she does is watch TV on her brand knew bedroom set, and HDTV, while I foot the bill. Go to work!

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"A theory that explains everything, explains nothing"

Like I said, RW, I'm not concerned about lazy bums. I'm more concerned about making our society better by helping out the middle class and the working (or legitimately needy) poor. Of course, when you help out a large groups, there will be a few lemons. I'm simply saying let's have a tax policy that rewards hard work and saving, and let's cut taxes for the working middle class and poor. The only way to do that is to increase taxes on the rich, but they have many economic options that most of us don't have access to. (For instance, the New York Times had an article today explaining how hedge fund managers can invest in offshore nontaxable funds and avoid paying taxes for five years, which has the net effect of lower their taxes by around 10%.)

I've said it before and I guess I have to say it again:

A conservative sees taxes as a means to generate revenue for the government and, as such, the goal should be to maximize revenue.

A liberal sees taxes as a socialistic policy that should redistribute wealth from the rich who have earned it to the poor who refuse to work for it.

A businessman making $150k pays $40k in taxes. An unemployed welfare momma with 9 kids takes in $40k per year from the government in welfare, food stams and health care. Which one of these two is not paying their fair share...?

I'll never live in the Hamptons so when you're there could you say Hi to Bill and Hillary for me?

How about reducing government expenditures, and lowering middle class taxes, and leaving the tax rate for the rich the same? The result would be the same, as middle class earners would have more money. Of course, for people in your bus, reducing government is never in the cards. It's the fricken rich dammit! We gotta get em! I'm opposed to rasing any taxes. I'm only in favor of reducing taxes, and reducing government. We spent what? $2.9 Trillion? How about spending $2.5, and giving that $400 billion to middle class earners?

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"A theory that explains everything, explains nothing"

I suck at word problems.....lets see....How about the buisness man who collects a $20 million paycheck, then pays 40% in taxes, then lays off 15,000 workers so he can outsources his jobs to ..... India ..... for another tax cut?

How about him?