Over the last 30 years tax rates for the middle class were increased and tax rates for the rich were cut, this was called supply side economics.
No, I mean placing more of what were once private individual concerns and responsibilities in the hands of the government, and worse yet a distant, centralized, corrupt federal government.
I was referring to the tendency of leftists to use the government, especially the distant, centralized, federal government to exert control over others. I was not specifically referring to your desired tax hikes.No one is proposing anything more extreme than the 90s. What did you find so horrible about the 90's?
I have clearly stated that ALL people with income should have five points added to the bracket that they are now in. You cannot get more egalitarian than that.
I would be in favor of abolishing all estate taxes. All we have to do is to follow the advice I have been giving for a long time now, consider all money going into a persons pocket as income and apply the proper bracket accordingly. If we did that, we have no reason to have special estate taxes.
No one is proposing anything more extreme than the 90s. What did you find so horrible about the 90's?
Can you source:
…30 years tax rates for the middle class were increased.
…this was called supply side economics
…or are these opinions?
Because I know enough about economics to know that making spending cuts when the private market is not producing makes a recession worse.
Over the last 30 years tax rates for the middle class were increased and tax rates for the rich were cut, this was called supply side economics. The theory was this would produce more jobs.
We now know this did not happen, and only made the rich richer and more of the middle class poor.
So, there is simply no reason to support the tax cuts for the rich any longer.
Not quite, supply side economics argues reducing the tax rates on EVERYBODY not just the rich.
Coincidently the Democrats are against section 199, ‘Domestic manufacturing tax deduction’, of the tax code which is argued to promote DOMESTIC manufacturing thus promoting outsoucing…
Maybe you misread the quote. It said ‘it will not help’ not ‘will not be enough’. See the difference?
A poll of ‘global’ investors is legitimate when considering US DOMESTIC economic policy? Is their agenda aligned with ours?
a majority of people want others to pay more taxes to clean up the mess those respondents helped create
call me shocked!!!
do you plan on creating another huge dot com bubble so those who were taxed too much had additional incomes?
your slavish devotion to the 90s is based on that premise which no one believes can happen again
[...] You pretend that the current rates are tax cuts when in reality they are normalizing the clinton Tax HIKES
the income tax was supposed to be temporary when enacted so its fair to say that anything other than no income taxes are tax hikes
envy
envy and lies
envy and class hatred
envy and spite
envy and spite
envy
envy or spite
envy
Does anybody have any real arguments in favor of the ultra low tax rates for rich investors?
No, it seems TurtleDude covered it quite well.
So there are no actual policy reasons to keep their taxes that low?
What, "ultra-low"?
That's according to you and your own subjective feelings. Perhaps people will have more interest in paying more taxes when the government begins spending their money more wisely.
What serious person would want to give their dollars to someone like Barrack Obama and his Czars?
uh someone paying 5% vs someone paying 40% is hardly egalitarian. and your system does not prevent your dem leaders from pandering to those paying 5% by promising them stuff paid for by increasing that 40% bracket even more. Its not a transaction to inherit money anymore than a gift is.
Despite being asked scores and scores of times, he has never provided and ration argument for a preferential discriminatory rate for capital gains.No, it seems TurtleDude covered it quite well.
So there are no actual policy reasons to keep their taxes that low?
Despite being asked scores and scores of times, he has never provided and ration argument for a preferential discriminatory rate for capital gains.
Can you?
Despite being asked scores and scores of times, he has never provided and ration argument for a preferential discriminatory rate for capital gains.
Can you?
We were told that if we gave the rich people bigger tax cuts, they would create more jobs.....................oh wait.............that didn't happen did it? Never mind.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?