This is from a comment on a the NY Times column - but this person said it better than I could:
The periods leading up to 1929 and 2008 were those with the lowest marginal rates since 1900. They were also the period when the richest 1% had the largest percentage of the income of the US. So what happened in 1929 and 2008? Catastrophe!!
When marginal rates are high the Rich reinvest their companies’ earnings. When they are low, they take the money and speculate.
During the period 1946 - 1973 taxes were much higher. Marginal rates were at least 70%; they were 93% under Eisenhower. The economy was better than what we now have. For example, median wages went up 3 times as fast as since 1973. Also I recently saw a graph of the national debt as a percentage of the GDP from 1946 to the present. It started high, went straight down until 1973, and then flatten out and in 1980 made a sharp turn and went straight up except for a wiggle during the Clinton administration. CEO’s earned 50 times what their workers earned; it is 500 times today. Staring in 1973, the percent of wealth and income taken by the richest 10%, 1%, and 0.1% has gone up at an ever increasing rate.
We are now told that taxes were too high during the Clinton administration, and it would be terrible to go back to them, but the economy was better then than what we have now. For example, 20,569,000 million private sector jobs were created during Clinton’s terms while Bush created 417,000 with 2 trillion in tax cuts.
Give me an example when raising taxes on the Rich hurt the economy. I have just given you two example when the opposite happened.
This is from a comment on a the NY Times column - but this person said it better than I could:
The periods leading up to 1929 and 2008 were those with the lowest marginal rates since 1900. They were also the period when the richest 1% had the largest percentage of the income of the US. So what happened in 1929 and 2008? Catastrophe!!
When marginal rates are high the Rich reinvest their companies’ earnings. When they are low, they take the money and speculate.
During the period 1946 - 1973 taxes were much higher. Marginal rates were at least 70%; they were 93% under Eisenhower. The economy was better than what we now have. For example, median wages went up 3 times as fast as since 1973. Also I recently saw a graph of the national debt as a percentage of the GDP from 1946 to the present. It started high, went straight down until 1973, and then flatten out and in 1980 made a sharp turn and went straight up except for a wiggle during the Clinton administration. CEO’s earned 50 times what their workers earned; it is 500 times today. Staring in 1973, the percent of wealth and income taken by the richest 10%, 1%, and 0.1% has gone up at an ever increasing rate.
We are now told that taxes were too high during the Clinton administration, and it would be terrible to go back to them, but the economy was better then than what we have now. For example, 20,569,000 million private sector jobs were created during Clinton’s terms while Bush created 417,000 with 2 trillion in tax cuts.
Give me an example when raising taxes on the Rich hurt the economy. I have just given you two example when the opposite happened.