National Debt vs Income Tax

[Vol8188]

When Reagan took office the top earners paid 70%.

Reagan dropped that to 50. By the end of his presidency he dropped it to the lowest level it had been since the 1920s, down to 28 percent.

HW then raised them back up to 31.

So in twelve years they managed to drop taxes on the wealthy by 39%.

In those same 12 years the national debt tripled.

Under the Clinton administration income taxes were raised to 39.6% and stayed that way until 2000

The result: a budget surplus.

2001 bush takes office and cuts these taxes again eventually dropping to 35%.

The result: national debt doubles in 8 years


The problem with our current debt isn't spending (although I agree some cuts need to be made), it's revenue. The top bracket should be returned to 50%.

 

[JoeKyleVol]

When Reagan took office the top earners paid 70%.

Reagan dropped that to 50. By the end of his presidency he dropped it to the lowest level it had been since the 1920s, down to 28 percent.

HW then raised them back up to 31.

So in twelve years they managed to drop taxes on the wealthy by 39%.

In those same 12 years the national debt tripled.

Under the Clinton administration income taxes were raised to 39.6% and stayed that way until 2000

The result: a budget surplus.

2001 bush takes office and cuts these taxes again eventually dropping to 35%.

The result: national debt doubles in 8 years


The problem with our current debt isn't spending (although I agree some cuts need to be made), it's revenue. The top bracket should be returned to 50%.

Oh, you did it now!

Prepare to be called a communist , criminal, and thief because you dare say that the extremely wealthy should pay more.

It's an odd thing to see the middle-class posters of Volnation so vehemently and so ardently defend the riches of the beleagured, suffering wealthy. It's like a medieval peasant arguing his lord's castle is not big enough.

 

[Vol8188]

Oh, you did it now!

Prepare to be called a communist , criminal, and thief because you dare say that the extremely wealthy should pay more.

It's an odd thing to see the middle-class posters of Volnation so vehemently and so ardently defend the riches of the beleagured, suffering wealthy. It's like a medieval peasant arguing his lord's castle is not big enough.

It's what they've been brainwashed to believe.

 

[allvol123]

The problem with our current debt isn't spending (although I agree some cuts need to be made), it's revenue..

Let the absurdity of this continue.

 

[Velo Vol]

The top bracket should be returned to 50%.

This percentage is based upon what? Why not 39%?

 

[Vol8188]

This percentage is based upon what? Why not 39%?

I'm basing it off historical numbers and trying to find something near the middle.

 

[Grand Vol]

Oh, you did it now!

Prepare to be called a communist , criminal, and thief because you dare say that the extremely wealthy should pay more.

It's an odd thing to see the middle-class posters of Volnation so vehemently and so ardently defend the riches of the beleagured, suffering wealthy. It's like a medieval peasant arguing his lord's castle is not big enough.

It's not about the top earners paying more. Well, sure it is. But that makes it "fair?" I'm successful so I have to pay more. Is that what this comes down to?

And the whole paying more is a farce anyway. Anyone with any significant amount of money knows where to hide it and avoid taxes. Just look at the heat caught by Romney in 2012 over his tax returns.

It doesn't matter if they pay more. More loopholes will be created to take advantage of. And that has an easy solution. Eliminate all the loopholes and go to a straight percentage on everyone. No deductions, no offshore holdings, none of that nonsense.

 

[Vol8188]

It's not about the top earners paying more. Well, sure it is. But that makes it "fair?" I'm successful so I have to pay more. Is that what this comes down to?

And the whole paying more is a farce anyway. Anyone with any significant amount of money knows where to hide it and avoid taxes. Just look at the heat caught by Romney in 2012 over his tax returns.

It doesn't matter if they pay more. More loopholes will be created to take advantage of. And that has an easy solution. Eliminate all the loopholes and go to a straight percentage on everyone. No deductions, no offshore holdings, none of that nonsense.

I'd have no problem with cutting all loop holes and keeping the current rate of 39.6% with 0 possible deductions.

 

[Grand Vol]

Let the absurdity of this 8188 continue.

fify

 

[Grand Vol]

I'd have no problem with cutting all loop holes and keeping the current rate of 39.6% with 0 possible deductions.

So you have no problem penalizing individuals who happen to be successful in their business endeavors? Because increasing tax rates on the "rich" is doing that specifically. And in that environment of bringing the wealthy down to the same level of the ordinary citizens, you have achieved equality comrade!

In your system, there is no incentive to do anything better or try to be more successful since you are penalized for it. So nobody will have the drive and determination to make more money since it will end up being taken anyway.

 

[allvol123]

People that refuse to pass budgets, have a spending problem. Not a revenue problem.

 

[utvolpj]

You're looking at the wrong side of the equation. Revenue is fine

Also, Clinton did not have a surplus unless govt math is used.

 

[82_VOL_83]

I will be glad to pay a little more as soon as:
1) a flat tax is implemented for EVERYONE. No deductions, no poverty line.
2) a balanced budget amendment is passed. if the $$ aren't there, it don't get spent. The reduction in spending CAN NOT come at the expense of the defense of the nation or it's security interests.
2a) term limits are implemented for the feds.
2b) States pay for the expenses of their federally elected officials. The only elected officials on the public dole should be the pres, vice pres, and the various appointed officials.
2c) All positions of czar are eliminated.
3) ANWAR and other public oil reserves are tapped to reduce or eliminate our dependence on the middle east.
4) SS is privatized.
5) Health Care is returned to a private enterprise and the fed gets out of it with only a few regulations left in place (like pre-existing conditions).
6) sexualtiy preference is declared to NOT be a minority and does not receive special consideration in anything. On the other hand, government employers may not discriminate based on sexuality in hiring. ANY employer that requests knowledge of ones sexuality should be fined such that they could possibly be put out of business.
7) Marriage is recognized as being the purview of the church. Civil unions are the purview of the government. Anyone can get a civil union, the church can marry anyone it pleases.
8) the borders are closed and those here illegally are sent home. An easier way to get a work Visa MUST accompany this.
9) use of anchor babies and pregnancies must be eliminated.
10) It becomes politically correct to be politically incorrect.

This is just my starter. Until such time, any of my tax money spent at the fed level for anything other than defense and infrastructure is too much. This excludes SS as that should have been/should be kept separate and should be privatized. Yes, I spat this out on a knee jerk, but it gets old hearing folks want to take my money for the betterment of people I don't concern myself with.

 

[Vol8188]

So you have no problem penalizing individuals who happen to be successful in their business endeavors? Because increasing tax rates on the "rich" is doing that specifically. And in that environment of bringing the wealthy down to the same level of the ordinary citizens, you have achieved equality comrade!

In your system, there is no incentive to do anything better or try to be more successful since you are penalized for it. So nobody will have the drive and determination to make more money since it will end up being taken anyway.

So from 1932-1986 no one was trying? Is that really your argument?

Do you feel we were a communist nation from 1932-1986?

 

[Grand Vol]

So from 1932-1986 no one trying? Is that really your argument?

Do you feel we were a communist nation from 1932-1986?

Likely the most intelligent post you've ever made on here.

I give the golf clap for finally catching me.

 

[82_VOL_83]

It's what they've been brainwashed to believe.

Yes, life experiences have a way of doing that. Come back when you are 50.

 

[#VFL__]

So you have no problem penalizing individuals who happen to be successful in their business endeavors? Because increasing tax rates on the "rich" is doing that specifically. And in that environment of bringing the wealthy down to the same level of the ordinary citizens, you have achieved equality comrade!

In your system, there is no incentive to do anything better or try to be more successful since you are penalized for it. So nobody will have the drive and determination to make more money since it will end up being taken anyway.

You assume that these wealthy individuals that he is talking about are wealthy because of THEIR success.

It's geared more to people like our gov. Who made a billion dollars last year because of something that his father did.

 

[Vol8188]

Yes, life experiences have a way of doing that. Come back when you are 50.

Why do you want to privatize SS? How about we pay back what we owe SS and leave it alone.

 

[golfballs]

Everyone should pay the same %

 

[Vol8188]

You're looking at the wrong side of the equation. Revenue is fine

Also, Clinton did not have a surplus unless govt math is used.

Explain the second part? His annual budget had no surplus?

 

[Grand Vol]

You assume that these wealthy individuals that he is talking about are wealthy because of THEIR success.

It's geared more to people like our gov. Who made a billion dollars last year because of something that his father did.

So you support the death tax?

 

[McDad]

8188,
With a top rate of 50% and no deductions allowed, how much additional revenue is produced?

 

[82_VOL_83]

Why do you want to privatize SS? How about we pay back what we owe SS and leave it alone.

Well, if we are operating purely in dreamland then fine, we can do it that way. I don't have any faith that it won't get robbed again.

 

[Velo Vol]

Anyone with any significant amount of money knows where to hide it and avoid taxes.

Correct. The tax rate is only part of the picture.

 

[allvol123]

Everyone should pay the same %

Too simple.


Complexity is much more useful in attaining votes for the ignorant masses and their emotional ties to class.