Help
FORUMS › General Discussions › Politics › The Congressional Research Service Nails Lid Shut on Coffin of Republican Party, GOP Tries to Kill Report
TOPIC: The_Congressional_Research_Service_Nails_Lid_Shut_on_Coffin_of_Republican_Party,_GOP_Tries_to_Kill_Report
« Prev  1  2 
11 to 15 of 15
User Details are only visible to members.
" If an average person exerting average effort can live decently, should anyone care that exceptional people become filthy rich?"

I agree completely. That being said the point of this is that the EFFECTS of a higher rate (I would combine this with disincentives for offshoring) tended to keep money in the economy and being invested in new capacity because the alternative was unacceptable (paying the higher tax rate). Similar effects were gained from the estate tax (hospitals and schools built in 'the name of' and donated land from the ultra wealthy made a big difference in society and the economy.

This is the essence of a progressive tax system, to make it hurt enough as it gets to the top rates to TRULY encourage those there to be 'job creators', because the alternative is simply too painful.

It's certainly been proven that left to their own devices, the wealthy simply takes more pie and returns little or no value for it. It's simple human nature...

East Fishkill NY
Username hidden
(3613 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I read the report. Nothing very surprising or new. A few things I noticed:

•Using top marginal tax rates is simplistic, especially for periods when they were so high. Very little income was actually taxed at those rates. I was glad to see that the paper included actual average rates (the IRS uses the term "effective" tax rate) in addition to nominal rates. 

•We have known for a long time that reducing top tax rates has not increased savings rates, as posited by supply-side proponents. Savings as a % of private income has fallen fairly steadily from the 10% range early in Reagan's term, down to rates as low as 1% before creeping back up. 

•I don't see much support for any causal connection between lower top rates and income disparity as noted in the paper. The lower quartiles of earners have seen their income grow more slowly because of globalization and increased productivity through technology, not simply because of tax rate changes. Even the paper's tables used pre-tax income, not after-tax. 

For the record, I don't think the government should be concerned with income disparity as much as it should focus on creating conditions that foster the ability of lower quartile earners to achieve a decent standard of living if they make reasonable efforts. If an average person exerting average effort can live decently, should anyone care that exceptional people become filthy rich? 

New Orleans LA
Username hidden
(12656 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
As does this:

"However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution. "

Congressional Research Service

East Fishkill NY
Username hidden
(3613 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
This bears repeating:

"There is not conclusive evidence, however, to substantiate a clear relationship between the 65-year steady reduction in the top tax rates and economic growth. Analysis of such data suggests the reduction in the top tax rates have had little association with saving, investment, or productivity growth. "

Congressional Research Service

East Fishkill NY
Username hidden
(3613 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Like I said, we are witnessing the last gasps of a corrupt and out of touch party, and now their entire premise for Conservatism and trickle down economics goes up in a puff of non-partisan smoke....

Taxes and the Economy: An Economic Analysis of the Top Tax Rates Since 1945

Thomas L. Hungerford Specialist in Public Finance September 14, 2012

(excerpt)

Throughout the late-1940s and 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was typically above 90%; today it is 35%. Additionally, the top capital gains tax rate was 25% in the 1950s and 1960s, 35% in the 1970s; today it is 15%. The real GDP growth rate averaged 4.2% and real per capita GDP increased annually by 2.4% in the 1950s. In the 2000s, the average real GDP growth rate was 1.7% and real per capita GDP increased annually by less than 1%.

There is not conclusive evidence, however, to substantiate a clear relationship between the 65-year steady reduction in the top tax rates and economic growth. Analysis of such data suggests the reduction in the top tax rates have had little association with saving, investment, or productivity growth.

However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution. The share of income accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009 recession. The evidence does not suggest necessarily a relationship between tax policy with regard to the top tax rates and the size of the economic pie, but there may be a relationship to how the economic pie is sliced.

Read the entire report here:

w w w.dpcc.senate. gov/files/documents/CRSTaxesandtheEconomy%20Top%20Rates.pdf

East Fishkill NY
Username hidden
(3613 posts)
« Prev  1  2 
11 to 15 of 15
TOPIC: The Congressional Research Service Nails Lid Shut on Coffin of Republican Party, GOP Tries to Kill Report
This site does not contain sexually explicit images as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2256.
Accordingly, neither this site nor the contents contained herein are covered by the record-keeping provisions of 18 USC 2257(a)-(c).
Disclaimer: This website contains adult material. You must be over 18 to enter or 21 where applicable by law.
All Members are over 18 years of age.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
 
Copyright © 1998-2016 DashBoardHosting, LLC. All Rights Reserved.