Page 109 of 212 FirstFirst ... 95999107108109110111119159209 ... LastLast
Results 1,081 to 1,090 of 2119

Thread: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

  1. #1081
    Holy Crap!
    Red Crow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Hawaii, USA
    Last Seen
    12-06-15 @ 11:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,429

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    I love the rants about the rich, the more industrious and the government owe people a living.
    Catch me if you can.

  2. #1082
    Educator snilloctjc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    El Paso, TX USA
    Last Seen
    05-04-15 @ 08:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    648

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes



    2012 Democrat Party Campaign Theme Song. Metal RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Silent sobs
    Invisible tears
    Life enveloped
    in unspoken fears.

  3. #1083
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    If you are going to use such figures as a means to negate my comment, the least you could do is take into consideration the other factors that your chart does not recognize.

    Your chart ranges from 1950-2010; let's examine the labor market from 1944 - 1950 for some background work.

    The labor force came off of record low unemployment in 1944 (1.2%) and by October 1949 a minor recession pushed unemployment up to 7.9%, yet by November 1950 labor markets had stabilized (4.2% unemployment). All the while, the top marginal tax rate was roughly 88.4%!

    You are probably thinking, "see, high taxes on the rich do not discourage employment growth!". What you are not taking into consideration is the composition of the said tax rates. Prior to 1942, the top marginal tax rate applied for people making over $5,000,000.00 annually (via income) which if we were to factor for inflation using the CPI it would be equivalent to around $66,000,000.00 or via the GDP deflator it would be approximately $55,300,000.00 in terms of 2010 dollars.

    Following WWII, the top bracket fell to $200,000.00 (about $2,250,000 in 2010 dollars) which brings me to effective taxation.

    Because i am totally unwilling to mine for effective tax data pre 1979 (of which the top rate was 70%), the numbers will not apply to the '40's '50's, 60's up to 1979, but the logic is identical and so it makes very little difference.

    The effective tax rate measuring all quintiles in 1979 was only 22%, while the effective rate for the top 1% of income earners was 37.4%. How can this be? Marginal tax rates work through brackets. Let's assume there were only two brackets, 25% and 50% for incomes over $100,000.00 and $1,000,000.00 respectively. Anyone earning less than $100k pays zero in taxes. Anyone earning between $100k and $999k pays only 25% and a person earning exactly $1 million pays only 25.000005%. An income of $10,000,000.00 (in this scenario) only pays 47.5% which would be their effective tax rate. The more the brackets and closer the partitions, the lower all effective tax rates become.

    Which is why there is a difference between marginal rates and effective (what you pay) rates.

    ================================================== ======

    How does your chart prove that raising taxes when unemployment is @ 9.2% will be labor market neutral?

    Answer: It does not!
    Last edited by Kushinator; 07-16-11 at 11:36 AM.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  4. #1084
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,187

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by snilloctjc View Post


    2012 Democrat Party Campaign Theme Song. Metal RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Lemmy for President!


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  5. #1085
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    This would be what we were talkng about:

    Florida has the fifth lowest corporate income tax rate in the country at 5.5 percent, trailing only South Dakota, Alaska, Wyoming and Nevada states hardly in Florida's league. Yet Florida's unemployment rate remains far higher than the 9.1 percent national average. Recently, both a Tax Foundation study and University of Central Florida economist Sean Snaith have argued that reducing taxes has no discernible impact on job growth.

    It's not hard to find evidence to support such a view. Other states with much higher corporate tax rates Connecticut, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York and New Jersey all enjoy significantly lower jobless numbers, as well as hosting the corporate headquarters of many more Fortune 500 companies per capita.

    Tax cuts don't create jobs - St. Petersburg Times

    There's a lot on this. It is about the mistaken notion that tax cuts create jobs and that tax increases lose jobs. There's no evidence to support that.

    is switching the subject yet another tactic of yours?
    In 5/11, Fla had an unemployment rate of 10,6%
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  6. #1086
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    How does your chart prove that raising taxes when unemployment is @ 9.2% will be labor market neutral?

    Answer: It does not!
    Which is why I never said that. You are arguing with a phantom. My chart merely rebuts the notion that tax cuts create jobs. Your comments about all the other factors that affect job growth indicates to me that you agree with this.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  7. #1087
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Which is why I never said that. You are arguing with a phantom. My chart merely rebuts the notion that tax cuts create jobs. Your comments about all the other factors that affect job growth indicates to me that you agree with this.
    As in all answers to economic problems.... it depends. If labor markets are in a funk, raising taxes is detrimental to job creation. However; if labor markets are at (or even near) their full employment potential, tax increases for those who have a low marginal propensity to consume domestic goods will be "somewhat" employment neutral.

    Raising taxes now would be a full on disaster!
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  8. #1088
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    As in all answers to economic problems.... it depends. If labor markets are in a funk, raising taxes is detrimental to job creation. However; if labor markets are at (or even near) their full employment potential, tax increases for those who have a low marginal propensity to consume domestic goods will be "somewhat" employment neutral.

    Raising taxes now would be a full on disaster!
    We're talking about increasing taxes on the wealthy, who have a high marginal propensity to consume domestic goods. Your own argument contradicts your own conclusion
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  9. #1089
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    We're talking about increasing taxes on the wealthy, who have a high marginal propensity to consume domestic goods. Your own argument contradicts your own conclusion
    The wealthy have a low marginal propensity to consume domestic goods which can be observed via savings rates throughout all income quintiles. People with negative to zero savings rates consume at 100%.

    The super wealthy do not (investment ≠ consumption).
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  10. #1090
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The greatest city on Earth
    Last Seen
    08-04-12 @ 04:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    31,089

    Re: Obama: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Raising taxes now would be a full on disaster!
    Bush Senior raised taxes during his term.

    what sort of disaster did it lead to?

Posting Permissions

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