What should our tax brackets be? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 31, 2024, 09:04:11 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  What should our tax brackets be? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: What should our tax brackets be?  (Read 1816 times)
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« on: July 25, 2013, 11:21:24 PM »

Top marginal tax rates during the Kennedy Administration were 65%. This was considered a tax "cut" because the previous top marginal tax rate was 91%. So I think that kind of disproves your point barfbag, especially considering the economic prosperity of the 1950s occurred during a time when the top marginal tax rates were in the 80-90% range.

Also, I think people give way too much bad credit to earmarks. Some of course are essentially a waste of appropriations, but this one might actually be legitimate. Especially considering beekeepers around the country are attempting to cope with CCD (colony-collapse disorder).

EDIT: I researched "Honeybee Insurance" and came up with an LA times article indicating that only a small amount of the $150,000,000 was directed towards honeybees; it was actually a part of a larger package for disaster insurance for all livestock, including cattle, pigs, sheep, and bees. Also, it merely funds a program created earlier by congress.

EVEN THEN, it was 150 million out of a 760 billion dollar stimulus. That comes out to about .2% of the total spending in the bill. It is less than .1% of the entire deficit.

Bottom line: there will always be "earmarks". Remember earmarks to a Virginia Republican or California Democrat is bacon to a North Dakota or Texas rancher. That's just the way government works.

In the meantime, there are those multi-billion dollar oil subsidies, and the tax breaks for those with private jets/yachts. I agree with you that those could use a little bit of austerity.
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2013, 03:52:59 PM »

The last time top marginal taxes have been this low was during the Roaring '20s, and we all know where that led us.
Seriously though, top marginal taxes during the '50s were at 90%. And yet this is perhaps the single greatest time of American prosperity ever. This was when the American Dream became real for most Americans.

And I will ask you a question: when was the last time significant change has come to Washington, in ANY presidency?
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #2 on: July 26, 2013, 07:46:11 PM »

The last time top marginal taxes have been this low was during the Roaring '20s, and we all know where that led us.
Seriously though, top marginal taxes during the '50s were at 90%. And yet this is perhaps the single greatest time of American prosperity ever. This was when the American Dream became real for most Americans.

And I will ask you a question: when was the last time significant change has come to Washington, in ANY presidency?

They went up when the Bush tax cuts expired.
Tax cuts went up for the top .8% (over $400,000) when their tax cuts expired. They went up about 5%. STILL lower than Reagan era levels.

Also, Oldiesfreak, why do you think taxes should be no higher than 20%? Was that number arbitrary?
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2013, 09:12:58 PM »

My mistake (though the tax rates on capital gains was higher then I believe, as were estate taxes.)
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #4 on: July 27, 2013, 11:43:11 AM »

A little bit of topic, but what do people think about having the child tax credit only be in effect for the first three or so children?
Logged
MalaspinaGold
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 987


« Reply #5 on: July 27, 2013, 05:34:04 PM »

Is there any noise to limit the child tax credit in Washington? I imagine some Republicans might oppose it because of the family, but I'm not sure.

What would be the arguments against it?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 11 queries.