Tax Cuts on the Rich Don't Help the Economy

[Vol Main]

Study: Tax Cuts for the Rich Don't Spur Growth - Yahoo! Finance

According to a study going back to 1945 by the non-partisan Congressional Research service, tax cuts on the super-rich do not produce significant investment and economic growth. That might be especially true today, with so much investment going overseas.

Some of you might be surprised to know that the tax rate on the top bracket was above 90% from 1945 until the 1960s, a period of respectable economic growth. Republicans often quote JFK's advocating a lowering of rates. Well, he was talking about lowering the rates from 90%. In the 1960s, the top bracket was lowered to around 70%. Republicans claim that President Obama wants to raise rates on the middle class, but that is not true. When the President proposed a budget with tax increases only for those with million dollar incomes and higher per year, the Republicans rejected it. That was not a proposed tax on the middle class; it was a tax on the super rich. That would have no significant effect on economic growth, unless the government channeled the money into the economy, to spur demand and increased production. At the very least, it would help reduce the budget deficit, which is in crisis.

 

[n_huffhines]

Congressional Research Service?....I'll be sure to put a lot of weight into their findings.

 

[MG1968]

if you think loopholes in the tax code today are bad, go back and check out some of the ways the people in the 90% bracket could get around paying the top rate

 

[volinbham]

What's missing from the OP?

1) The question is will tax hikes on the "rich" hurt the economy? Even Bill Clinton thinks so along with several studies and many/most economists.

2) What is "rich"? Obama has repeatedly indicated 200K for individuals and 250K for families; not the 1 million in the OP. The Dems in Congress proposed the 1 million since even they thought the 200/250 was a bad idea at the time (economic situation).

3) The proposed cap gains hike and dividend hike in particular will impact the middle class.

4) I could live with the tax hikes IF I had any faith it would all go to deficit reduction. We all know that the plan is to increase spending err, I mean "investment" in our bridges, schools, police, education, etc. etc.

 

[utvolpj]

those inflated rates from the past included so many deductions that it was never paid (things like auto loan interest).

Obama just got a middle-class tax approved by the USSC. How is that not true?

the govt takes in plenty of money but they spend it wrong. Sorry, that's not the fault of the super wealthy

 

[Vol Main]

SAVE THE RICH!

Vote Republican.

 

[MG1968]

SAVE THE RICH!

Vote Republican.

I like rich people. They provide a market for things like the Bugatti Veyron and the AB Yachts 140.

 

[Vol Main]

those inflated rates from the past included so many deductions that it was never paid (things like auto loan interest).

Obama just got a middle-class tax approved by the USSC. How is that not true?

the govt takes in plenty of money but they spend it wrong. Sorry, that's not the fault of the super wealthy

Source please. Don't tell me the dog ate your bibliography.

 

[utvolpj]

Source?

my head

(Reagan did it, don't remember the year)

Edit: did the work for you

Tax Reform Act of 1986

The new code gradually phased out all deductions for interest paid on car loans, charge-account purchases, vacations and anything else that fell under what the law termed “consumer loans.”

Edit:

another explaining how long it existed

Eliminating the mother of all tax deductions | Deseret News

The original 1913 income tax code allowed people to deduct all interest from their income when figuring out their income tax.

 

[hndog609]

I like rich people. They provide a market for things like the Bugatti Veyron and the AB Yachts 140.

Color me biased but I hope to hell my employer stays happily in the black financially.

 

[Vol Main]

Color me biased but I hope to hell my employer stays happily in the black financially.

If he has a million dollars per year income, I'd say that's in the black. But we should still commiserate with his terrible deprivations and vote Republican. Save the rich!

 

[Vol Main]

Congressional Research Service?....I'll be sure to put a lot of weight into their findings.

Do you say that as if your source is more credible? No, because you have no source. Think about this; the great post WWII economic boom occurred with a tax rate of 90+% on the top income bracket. That's a fact. Were there loopholes? Well sure there were. That doesn't change the fact that the tax rate on top bracket was 90%. That seems ridiculously high to me, as does the 70% rate in effect from the 60s until the 80s. But what we're talking about now is a mere 5% increase to around 40% to help resolve the budget crisis. That is not ridiculous, and it is not wrong for the country. It is right for the country.

 

[utvolpj]

The budget crisis doesn't exist because we have too little money

 

[bamawriter]

Whether or not tax cuts on the rich spur growth is debatable. But it's been proven that tax hikes don't equate to increases in tax revenues.

 

[Gramps]

my head

(Reagan did it, don't remember the year)

Edit: did the work for you

Tax Reform Act of 1986

Edit:

another explaining how long it existed

Eliminating the mother of all tax deductions | Deseret News

That same bill increased capital gains from 20% to 28% to the same rate as the top rate on income tax.

 

[VolsNSkinsFan]

If you raise taxes on dividends and capital gains you are going to hurt middle-class retirees living on fixed incomes the most

 

[Gramps]

Increasing the tax rate on the rich or middle class will not help get the debt paid down. They still have all the loopholes to lower the rate they actually pay. If it did bring in more revenue the idiots in Washington would spend it on more "pet projects.
The GOP is talking a good game now but when they were in control they spent just as bad as the dems.
I wouldn't object to pay a little more in taxes for a few years to help get the nation our of debt but Washington has no desire to actually fix America.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Source please. Don't tell me the dog ate your bibliography.

funny that you didn't lend the same scrutiny to the article to you supplied. Did you notice the language? Did you notice the total lack of support for the findings?

 

[Vol Main]

Whether or not tax cuts on the rich spur growth is debatable. But it's been proven that tax hikes don't equate to increases in tax revenues.

It's been argued, not proven. Economic growth drives revenue increases more that higher rates. We need to get the economy moving again, and that means putting more money into it. If the super rich won't put money into the economy, then who will?

 

[Vol Main]

funny that you didn't lend the same scrutiny to the article to you supplied. Did you notice the language? Did you notice the total lack of support for the findings?

Yours is an old act. You cry for sources, only to cheap shot sources when they are provided. That's when you're not pretending that they aren't there when they are there. There was an entire academic study referenced in my post on Keystone Pipeline, and you acted like there was no reference at all. FYI, one of my unreferenced sources on that topic was a CIA study, but I'll have to gt back to you with that.

 

[VolsNSkinsFan]

You can't force growth. Money is like water, it flows toward the path of least resistance.

 

[Vol Main]

Increasing the tax rate on the rich or middle class will not help get the debt paid down. They still have all the loopholes to lower the rate they actually pay. If it did bring in more revenue the idiots in Washington would spend it on more "pet projects.
The GOP is talking a good game now but when they were in control they spent just as bad as the dems.
I wouldn't object to pay a little more in taxes for a few years to help get the nation our of debt but Washington has no desire to actually fix America.

During the budget negotiations between Congress and President Obama, the Republican position was that closing tax loopholes would be a tax increase, so they opposed closing them.

SAVE THE RICH!
Vote Republican

 

[Vol Main]

If you raise taxes on dividends and capital gains you are going to hurt middle-class retirees living on fixed incomes the most

I do not support President Obama's proposal to raise capital gains back to 28%. It is now at 15%, and I don't think it should go higher than 18% for those under the highest income bracket. An exception should be made for the super rich; an 18% rate is too low for those who make sick amounts of money.

 

[Gramps]

During the budget negotiations between Congress and President Obama, the Republican position was that closing tax loopholes would be a tax increase, so they opposed closing them.

SAVE THE RICH!
Vote Republican

Closing loopholes is a tax increase.

The simple thing to do is set a lower tax rate and end all loopholes. The Dems nor GOP neither one would agree to that.

 

[Vol Main]

Closing loopholes is a tax increase.

The simple thing to do is set a lower tax rate and end all loopholes. The Dems nor GOP neither one would agree to that.

That's right, neither party will do that. The national parties derive power from the tax code and government contracts.