November 21, 2009

A Case for Raising Taxes

Dave Johnson makes a very smart case for taxing the rich. As he said, in the hey-day of steep taxes on the rich, America did a much better job of living up to its billing as a land of opportunity for all and everyone was better off then.

While America has always been a place where a person could get rich, it used to be that you got rich a bit more slowly, and everyone benefited in the process. This is because we used to have very high tax rates at the top.

A person could do very well, but income that came in above a certain level was highly taxed and used to pay for the teachers, police, courts and roads that enabled businesses to thrive. Just how high were taxes? During America's "golden years" of 1951-1963, tax rates were over 90 percent on income over $400,000. Then through the 1960s and 70s, they were 70 percent on income above $200,000.

In my opinion, Dave has always been one of the best people to read when you want to understand the politics of the economics as he focuses on who exactly is our economy for. You can see more of Dave at Seeing The Forest or the Campaign for America's Future.

Posted by Mary at November 21, 2009 09:02 AM | Economy | Technorati links |

I don't believe that raising taxes solves anything, however being smarter with what we spend our money on makes a ton of sense. What if we took 10% of the military budget(about 5% of the total budget) and applied that to universal health care? Case closed and I think we're better for it as a country and a world!

Posted by: wine clubs at November 21, 2009 04:54 PM

96% to be exact, but remember the 60's had all sorts of write downs available. President Reagan brought the rate down and did away with many of the write downs. Since then we've added many more write downs while increasing the rate back up to the 36/39% it is today.

How about the CRU getting hacked, just like Palin's email? Anywhere from 62 megs all the way up to 160 megs of emails and corresponding files taken and revealed. Amazing content, even Andrew Revkin at the NYTimes confirms it. Then there's the IBD editorial titled "The Day Global Warming Stood Still". "We are told in sad tones that "not much is happening with global warming at the moment" and that "it even looks as though global warming could come to a standstill this year." But how can it be that the earth isn't following all those computer models? Is the earth goddess Gaia herself a climate change "denier"?"

Posted by: peter at November 21, 2009 09:51 PM

I think the USA are rich by the rich of it's people. Almost the all of the USA citizens are people which emigrated from other countries some day ago.

Posted by: Tennis odds at November 24, 2009 04:06 AM

Taxing structure has to be even for all citizens in my view.

Posted by: Lung Cancer at November 28, 2009 05:13 AM