Posts Tagged ‘tax rates’

In an interview with Anderson Cooper a few weeks ago, United States Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez proposed raising the top marginal tax rate on the rich to 70 percent on earnings of $10 million and above. Cooper suggested this was radical for our time. Ocasio-Cortez replied, “If that’s what radical means, then call me a radical.” 45 percent of Republican voters and 71 percent of Democrats are Ocasio-Cortez radicals on the subject.

Ocasio-Cortez did add an important qualifier to explain how marginal tax rates work, “That doesn’t mean all $10 million are taxed at an extremely high rate, but it means that as you climb up this ladder you should be contributing more.” That explanation is important because some fools on the right who have their strings pulled by the rich have deliberately used language to try to confuse voters, giving them the impression that tax increase proposals like this would affect most Americans, which they do not; think Fox News, the Republican National Committee, the Democratic National Committee, the Koch Brothers, and the entire corporate news networks.

The poll, conducted by The Hill-HarrisX, found that 59 percent of registered voters support a 70 percent tax rate on every dollar a person makes above 10 million annually. The poll found the idea cuts across partisan divides, garnering support from 71 percent of Democrats, 60 percent of independents and 45 percent of Republicans. Along gender lines, 62 percent of women supported the measure, while 55 percent of men agree the top marginal tax rate should be raised to 70 percent.

The proposal would bring the top marginal tax rate back to where it was in the 1970s when income above $200,000 (the equivalent of $1.3 million in today’s money) was taxed at 70 percent. Ronald Reagan then lowered it in the 80s to 50 percent, and later to 28 percent.

Do not expect the Republican and Democratic Party leadership to support such a proposal, even though the federal deficit is running rampant due to the Trump and Republican Party tax cuts for the rich and their corporations. The leaders of both major parties are guided in establishing public policy solely by whatever cash the rich dole out to them. That means these politicians implement public policy with an eye toward enriching their benefactors at the expense of the 99 percent.

Ocasio-Cortez reacted to the news of the poll in a tweet, naturally, by referencing a decades-old meme, saying to Republicans, “All your base (are) belong to us.”

Americans Support Taxing the Rich–Rolling Stone Magazine

Read Full Post »

There they go again. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) recently suggested the United States should raise the top marginal tax rate on the rich to over 70 percent. Republicans, naturally, have attacked her as being crazy, although all the evidence points toward higher marginal tax rates on the rich produces a stronger United States economy for all citizens, not just the rich ones.

As you can see from the graph above, the higher the tax rate on the rich, the stronger is GNP growth. The same can be said for jobs and wage growth. It can also be pointed out that when the rich have fewer dollars to spend, they have less spare change to bribe politicians with political contributions.

The only crazy people out there on this issue are Republicans, as usual, performing their jobs as lying lap dogs of the rich. As I have been saying for years, there is not a shred of evidence that suggests, as the Republican Party lap dogs proclaim, that lowering taxes on the rich has created a single job, and you can see that from the graph.

There is a ton of evidence in the form of peer-reviewed studies that show AOC is correct.

Paul Krugman recently wrote, “Republicans almost universally advocate low taxes on the wealthy, based on the claim that tax cuts at the top will have huge beneficial effects on the economy. This claim rests on research by … well, nobody. There isn’t any body of serious work supporting G.O.P. tax ideas, because the evidence is overwhelmingly against those ideas.”

Reducing taxes on the rich have always reduced gross domestic product, wages, and job creation. It also creates income and wealth inequality since the rich have more income to burn at buying both Republican and Democratic Party lap dogs, such as Mitch McConnell and Ron Wyden. These guys have voted time and again to redistribute income from the 99 to the 1 percent.

The Case for a Progressive Tax: From Basic Research to Policy Recommendations-Journal of Economic Perspectives

Why one editor won’t run any more op-eds by the Heritage Foundation’s top economist–Columbia Journalism Review

Read Full Post »

Texas and Kansas are the homes of low taxes, low wages and fewer regulations. California is the state of high taxes (especially on the rich), high wages and more regulations. According to conservative economic gospel, Kansas and Texas should be outperforming California.

However, the reality is the opposite. California easily outperforms Kansas and Texas and any other states that are low tax, low wage, and fewer regulations. Robert Reich explains why in the video above.

On the other hand, Minnesota is a higher tax state than Wisconsin. Guess which one is performing the best. You bet. It’s Minnesota.

Forbes magazine listed Minnesota No. 9 in its 2014 ranking of best states for business, even though it had a higher tax rate than Wisconsin. In this same ranking, Wisconsin rated number 32.

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

US Senator Elizabeth Warren is, of course, is describing a government corrupt to the marrow.

The corruption of the US government goes way back, but a relatively small wave held in check by the New Deal turned into a tidal wave of corruption beginning with the tax cuts for the rich of President Ronald Reagan. That money was used by the 1 percent to stimulate corruption at all levels, and which in turn purchased legislation that redistributes income from the 99 to the 1 percent. That’s why we have inequality and its growing.

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

The rich hardly pay any taxes. That’s why there’s a federal deficit, at least in part. Let’s get something straight; corporations are rich people, just ask Mitt Romney. Okay Mitt is an idiot. Always has been. We all know corporations are not people. But they are tools of the rich that enable them to redistribute income from the 99 to the 1 percent.

Corporations have bought off tons of politicians of both political parties with their tax breaks, such as Wall Street Fetch Boy Ron Wyden, supposedly a senator from Oregon, but on matters of income redistribution, the senator always sides with the Wall Street one-percenters.

Corporate profits are currently at an all-time high (while worker wages as a percentage of the economy have plummeted to record lows–Thank you Senator Wyden). Guess what? Corporate income tax revenue is going to be about 1.5 percent of GDP this year, below the recent average and far below the amount raised by the tax just a few decades ago. Just look at the chart below, back in the early 1950s, corporate profits were taxed high enough that they were about 35 percent of federal tax revenues.

So Mitt? Why aren’t these people taxed at a higher rate? The answer is simple. Wall Street is a Ponzi scheme. If corporate profits don’t always go up in the long-term, they would either stay stagnate or go down. In which case, Wall Street would go down with corporate share prices. The Ponzi scam would self-destruct.

As income has been redistributed for the last 30 years, the demand for goods and services has shrunk. That means corporations have to boost income in other ways than selling more of their stuff. So they ship jobs overseas and pay legislators big bucks to pass legislation allowing them to reduce their tax burden. That’s what has occurred over the last thirty years. That means more money flows to the 1 percent via higher profits, dividends and share prices. The rest of us pay the price, such as reduced government services, lower paychecks, rotting schools and more lumpy streets. That you Senator Wyden.

We’ve got idiots like Wyden talking about cutting Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits for the aged and the infirmed. That’s crazy. Especially since the Social Security Trust Fund has a $2.5 trillion surplus that earns about $118 billion a year in interest.

Let’s solve the problem easily. Tax corporations more, like in the good old days, and watch the Wall Street Ponzi Scam collapse. We’d be saving our livelihoods, our economy and a lot more.

As the Century Foundation noted in the chart below, the corporate income tax, as a share of total government revenue, used to track reasonably well with corporate profits. But in the last decade, the two have become decoupled:

CEO's are getting record salaries and bonuess, the 1 percent are using their corporate machines to jack up share prices and dividends

Corporate profits are up, dividends are up, share prices are up, and corporate tax payments are down, down, down. Anybody see a relationship here?

By the way, the video below is when Mitt the Twit said corporations are people. But Dumb Dumb never figured out in what hospital any of them were given birth.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: