[Shalako]

There cannot possibly be over 3 people in the U.S. who understand Economics. Increasing taxes always results in LESS Government revenue--its been tried before many times. Additionally, if the Govt. confiscated ALL the yearly earnings of those making $250,000 and over, it wouldn't nearly equal the deficit for one Year. The problem is overspending-this cannot possibly be corrected by even more spending. It is impossible to borrow yourself into solvency or to spend yourself into prosperity--I tried that in my youth and it didn't work. U.S. citiznes are going to learn a hard lesson about this--ti's already in the cards.

[Tetto]

Fear not, this will bring things into perspective...

YouTube - Brother, Can You Spare A Trillion?: Government Gone Wild!

[JViello]

Originally Posted by 7 Wishes

I mostly agree with this but want to note that if you interpret the chart correctly, it's only the early Reagan years that are higher in tax than the 1990s. Using 1981-83 as a baseline is a bad idea as the economy was almost as bad as it is now and actually supports the argument that lowering tax rates from 50-28% is "economic juice".

Now that said, I think 50% is too high, but 39.6% (what it would go to from 35% if tax cuts expire for those over 250K or 500K or $1M or whatever) isn't. I do find it astonishing that top tax rates were 90% in the 1950s, I can't imagine THAT being an incentive to make any money (interesting side note, it was JFK of all people who agreed with that and lowered it to 70%.....but personally I think once you're taking half or more of anyone's income no matter how rich it is counterproductive....40% should be the max).

ITA. I would just like to give some historical perspective on the 90+% tax rate in the 50's.

We just came out of WWII where we stopped evil from ruling the world. We spent like CRAZY to do that, and in fact our debt was over 100% of GDP. However, it was a short term spike in debt, not a systemic problem like you see today.

It's like having a fiscally responsible household and you have an emergency and take on some debt. Well, after the emergency has passed you use your fiscally conservative policies and allocate all your funds to pay down that debt.

Today, we are paying for a bunch of fluff and bloat, not an emergency to save the world from tyranny. Big...HUGE difference.

Originally Posted by Dallascaper

Some perspective:

The U.S. Debt Would Make One Sweet $114.5 Trillion Skyscraper

I didn't click on the link but if it's the sight putting $100 bills into specifics, it's a great link.

Originally Posted by Dallascaper

I'm afraid raising taxes on the rich wont do much but put a dent in our problem. And the so-called debt crisis we just experienced is just a taste of the brawls DC will be fighting over the next 10-20 years. It's going to get ugly.

[/font][/color]

Absolutely see my Greece reference and reply below.

Originally Posted by Tin Knocker

We shouldn't get anything back from Washington anyway. We need to rid the country of the concept of giving the feds money & then begging for it back.

Agreed, and that was my point about the system being redistributive.

Originally Posted by Shalako

There cannot possibly be over 3 people in the U.S. who understand Economics. Increasing taxes always results in LESS Government revenue--its been tried before many times. Additionally, if the Govt. confiscated ALL the yearly earnings of those making $250,000 and over, it wouldn't nearly equal the deficit for one Year. The problem is overspending-this cannot possibly be corrected by even more spending. It is impossible to borrow yourself into solvency or to spend yourself into prosperity--I tried that in my youth and it didn't work. U.S. citiznes are going to learn a hard lesson about this--ti's already in the cards.

Bingo bingo bingo! That's why I put the figures in my original post that I did. I did the math in the past and if we liquidated every millionaire over 10 million and billionaire and bankrupted them it would equal a net worth of about 7 trillion dollars. HALF our national debt. It's THAT bad.

[7 Wishes]

Originally Posted by Angelic_Avalon

Washington CD is part of the south anyways... they must hate the yankees LOL

Nah, it's as "Yankee" as NY or Philly....the south begins just before Richmond nowadays....and DC was hardly ever "dixie country" anyways (contrary to popular belief, nearby Baltimore has been "yankee country" since maybe 2 decades after the Civil War when the same "white ethnics" who make up most of the population of the Boston-Philly region immigrated there as well).

Originally Posted by Shalako

Increasing taxes always results in LESS Government revenue--its been tried before many times.

Not quite true, the trick is to find the tax rate that optimizes revenue. I'm sure if the top tax rate were 5% even you would disagree with your statement above, at that low a rate no amount of so-called "trickle down" would make up for it. In my view that optimization is a top rate of 40%.