Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just as soon as you tell us where the jobs went...
Jobs dont need to go anywhere. A retail store can drop from 100 employees to 90, without having those 10 jobs go somewhere else.. Especially if there is less people buying products..
That's worth discussion, but there were also other things happening at the time. The .com bubble had burst and 9/11 had caused a lot of uncertainty.
We were just barely coming out of the depression when we entered WWII, and there taxes went up to 90%. The economy was in far worse shape in 1940/41 than it was in 99 - 01.
Obama's jobs are mostly government jobs...practically nothing in private sector..stop getting your information from the left wing blogs...tax cuts work...welfare doesn't
It benefited the upper 10% more than any other group, at a time of war.
It did not.. As a DOLLAR figure the rich got a larger cut, but thats because they pay more. You cant give someone who earns $10K a year a larger tax cut than someone who earns $500K a year.. it doesnt worth mathmatically..
The poor got a higher percentage AND often times tax REFUNDS for money they didnt pay.. Sorry but getting free money is much better than paying less no matter what income level you reside on..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
In the past, when we have been at war, the upper 10% was paying a 90% income tax. First President in history to lower taxes during a war, George Bush.
thats just bull and you know it, but hey, if we're going to start to compare historical tax rates.. Why dont we compare the tax rates to what they were during the American Independance War, when we fought over a few percentage points of a tea tax..
Explain this, since as the right likes to say often, the rich create jobs, therefore more taxes, against the top wage earners....hurt the USA.
Explain the Bush years with under 5% unemployment??? Or explain the 0bama era of debt and despair, with 10% unemployment as far as the eye can see??
Then explain to me how raising taxes, and taking more wealth from the people translates into more employment??
Let's say the government raises taxes, and loots $150 million dollars from a county in Wisconsin. That means there is now $150 million less in profits that could be used to renovate, expand, raise wages, hire new employees, invest in new equipment.
Your argument is that our money is more wisely spent by government, even if the people in the above community never see a dime of their taxes, because it went to refurbish a bridge in another state, or is being used to study why pigs stink, or to help promote birth control overseas?
We were just barely coming out of the depression when we entered WWII, and there taxes went up to 90%. The economy was in far worse shape in 1940/41 than it was in 99 - 01.
Yes the taxes did go that high, however the effective tax rate was not that high. It is currently fairly close to what it was then.
Yes the taxes did go that high, however the effective tax rate was not that high. It is currently fairly close to what it was then.
...and this deficit spending by the democrats is nothing more then a tax increase, since the only way we will pay if off is thru increased taxes down the road.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
