Page 2 of 15 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 219
  1. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tikited View Post
    "The top tax rate was above 90 percent during the 1950s, and while it has slowly descended," noted the Washington Post's Jeff Stein on Saturday, "it remained as high as 50 percent for much of President Ronald Reagan’s tenure in the 1980s."

    I would help the people freaking out about this possibility to know what had happened in the past. Then argue away.
    Most people were able to change the nature of their income to avoid paying 90% rates. Very few people have an interest in paying 90% tax rates, and would rather just not work than only collect 10%. The mistake progressives make is thinking everything stays the same when rates are raised to the level except the money rolling in.

    Second, the issue people have with AOCs plan, which ZERO progressives on this board were able to understand, is not that the rates were unfair, is not that we didn't understand marginal rates, it's that the rates she's describing will come nowhere close to balancing the deficit let along paying for her huge spending plans.

    Socialists like AOC will need to be honest, they are going to need to tax everyone at 60% rates in order to pay for all of this. If everyone wants to pay 60% rates, fine.


  2. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    30,954
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    'Congress enacted an income tax in October 1913 as part of the Revenue Act of 1913, levying a 1% tax on net personal incomes above $3,000, with a 6% surtax on incomes above $500,000. By 1918, the top rate of the income tax was increased to 77% (on income over $1,000,000, equivalent of $16,717,815 in 2018 dollars[20]) to finance World War I. The average rate for the rich however, was 15%.[21] The top marginal tax rate was reduced to 58% in 1922, to 25% in 1925 and finally to 24% in 1929. In 1932 the top marginal tax rate was increased to 63% during the Great Depression and steadily increased, reaching 94% in 1944[22] (on income over $200,000, equivalent of $2,868,625 in 2018 dollars[23]). During World War II, Congress introduced payroll withholding and quarterly tax payments."

    I'm sure the initial pitch for the income tax was like, we'll just take 1%, that will be all the money we'll ever need. And then 5 years later, well, how about 77%?

    There's never enough money. 90% tax rates across the board wouldn't be enough money. The 'needs' are infinite. Literally.
    God Bless Calvin Coolidge. Best President Ever!

  3. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    God Bless Calvin Coolidge. Best President Ever!
    Your regular rips of Coolidge are the best proof that you are a gigantic liar. So please keep them coming.

  4. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tikited View Post
    Past Republican administrations had taxes after 10 million up to 90%. Just saying.
    tikited- nobody paid it. You could deduct almost everything and there were tons of different accelerated depreciation investments that the richest people used to get rid of the tax burden. That is not at all a fair comparison. Here's why:

    https://econscius.wordpress.com/2013...y-no-one-paid/

  5. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tikited View Post
    "The top tax rate was above 90 percent during the 1950s, and while it has slowly descended," noted the Washington Post's Jeff Stein on Saturday, "it remained as high as 50 percent for much of President Ronald Reagan’s tenure in the 1980s."

    I would help the people freaking out about this possibility to know what had happened in the past. Then argue away.
    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    tikited- nobody paid it. You could deduct almost everything and there were tons of different accelerated depreciation investments that the richest people used to get rid of the tax burden. That is not at all a fair comparison. Here's why:

    https://econscius.wordpress.com/2013...y-no-one-paid/
    Nonsense. I would NEVER expect the Washington Post to try to slant things in any way. That being said, I would LOVE the deduction and depreciation provisions that were in place back then. Woo Hoo!!!
    - Respect is the ultimate currency

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    30,954
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    Your regular rips of Coolidge are the best proof that you are a gigantic liar. So please keep them coming.
    When did I rip him? Just your ripping of Lincoln as the worst while declaring him the best.

    It's a shame he left it at 24% though. Still theft.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    30,954
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    tikited- nobody paid it. You could deduct almost everything and there were tons of different accelerated depreciation investments that the richest people used to get rid of the tax burden. That is not at all a fair comparison. Here's why:

    https://econscius.wordpress.com/2013...y-no-one-paid/
    There still are.

  8. #23

    Default

    True story. I was once a delegate to the state Republican convention as a Steve Forbes delegate. Still like the flat tax.

  9. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gophers_4life View Post
    Working hard doesn't make you rich.

    Try working construction on a day like today. You wouldn't last an hour.
    Hahaha. Youíre right. Itís takes hard work and being smart. Construction workers are generally a pretty stupid group. Now, the guy or gal that owns the construction company thatís another story.

    I always find it funny when the left complains about executive salaries being too high, instead of working hard to become an executive.

  10. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    When did I rip him? Just your ripping of Lincoln as the worst while declaring him the best.

    It's a shame he left it at 24% though. Still theft.
    Itís a running gag with you. Coolidge! Heís everything you claim to be for. Your dishonesty is not hard to see Howie.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Right behind you
    Posts
    11,993

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ogee Oglethorpe View Post
    Nonsense. I would NEVER expect the Washington Post to try to slant things in any way. That being said, I would LOVE the deduction and depreciation provisions that were in place back then. Woo Hoo!!!
    Do you accept any new source?
    Aloha Mr. Hand

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Right behind you
    Posts
    11,993

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bga1 View Post
    tikited- nobody paid it. You could deduct almost everything and there were tons of different accelerated depreciation investments that the richest people used to get rid of the tax burden. That is not at all a fair comparison. Here's why:

    https://econscius.wordpress.com/2013...y-no-one-paid/
    For 2 as well: That isn't my point. Some of you have acted like Alexandria is doing something unheard of, along with terrible, when that is very far from the truth. It is what has been done before-led by Repubs at times.
    Aloha Mr. Hand

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    30,954
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Section2 View Post
    It’s a running gag with you. Coolidge! He’s everything you claim to be for. Your dishonesty is not hard to see Howie.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I'm sure he was a fine man, but I'm pretty sure you're the only living member of his fan club.

  14. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tikited View Post
    Do you accept any new source?
    That's actually a very good question. I don't know for sure. I know that there's virtually nothing that I look at or read that I'm not conscious of any bias. In all honesty, I don't really seek out the news from anything online. I concern myself with winning work/contracts, keeping my employees employed, and making as much money as I can in the process.

    I know this isn't exactly what you were talking about but I've been unbelievably happy with the content that I've found since I subscribed to The Athletic. I know you were referring more to the news than just sports but The Athletic is fantastic, virtually unbiased sports writing and sports coverage.

    Maybe this is where things need to go; pay news sites, sites that use actual reporters without an agenda or bias built in. It's working for The Athletic, I hope it continues to gain steam.

    Who is really looking for news or information anymore? People are looking for AFFIRMATION, hardly anyone is looking for INFORMATION. Virtually everyone on this board, left or right, seeks out tweets, writers, blogs, news sources that AFFIRM or reinforce their own existing opinions. I doubt I could count more than a small handful on the board who are truly seeking out unbiased INFORMATION; everyone just looks for what they want to see. I guess if that makes you feel good, have at it. I don't need to scour the internet like JTF for things like that to make myself feel better about my life or my opinions on politics.
    - Respect is the ultimate currency

  15. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howeda7 View Post
    I'm sure he was a fine man, but I'm pretty sure you're the only living member of his fan club.
    Absolutely false. Iíd rather you just admitted you know nothing about him.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •