Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

isn't it fairly obvious that the top marginal tax rates have to go UP...?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 11:53 AM
Original message
isn't it fairly obvious that the top marginal tax rates have to go UP...?
appreciably.

ronbo raygun slashed the rates, and said that it would increase prosperity so much for everyone, that revenues would be more than enough to keep the country running.

but the revenues never materialized, and we've been living on borrowed money and accounting tricks ever since.

and now our trick bag is pretty much empty, and we've dug ourselves a hole that we can't borrow our way out of.

the 'wealth gap' has become a chasm, and fewer and fewer people who want to cross it are able to.

the money and the wealth IS there...or rather here- in our own country.

with cities and states going broke- having to cut services and sell resources- isn't it time that we re-tap some of that wealth by going back to tax rates that worked...?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Wapsie B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. He slashed the rates for some but took away the personal interest deduction.
That's a significant tax increase by itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. actually they have to go up across the board
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Actually, they don't.
Income taxes were never meant to rely on the sweat of one's brow and were never meant to cut into subsistence for the poorest. With 40% of OASDI contributions being robbed and used in the General Fund, that's exactly what Reagan and his followers did to us.

What we need to do is create a much more progressive system, with tax rates going to near confiscatory levels for obscene incomes over, say, five million. One thing you can say about the progressive income tax with a top marginal rate of 90%, it provided a disincentive to executive greed until first Kennedy and then Reagan decreased it.

Nearly all of Stupid's budget deficits can be traced to one thing: his reckless tax cuts that disproportionately favored the obscenely rich. Simply allowing those tax cuts to sunset might slow the deficits but we need to reverse them. Hiking taxes on the favored class is the way to do that.

They stole it. Now they need to give it back.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. What we really need is an increase in capital gains taxes
The wealthiest make most of their money on speculative investments.

A higher cap gains tax would also significantly reduce the churn in the markets, which has destabilized our economy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. income is income- capital gains should be taxed at the same rate as wages.
however- i could see some type of allowance for the first 50k or so for retirees, who planned for their retirement under the current tax code.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 12:06 PM
Response to Original message
4. A bunch of tax changes are obvious and are certain not to happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerDittoHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 12:10 PM
Response to Original message
5. How about having unearned income subject to SSI?
Even if it was only the 'employee' side, and then subject to the same limit of ~$90k a year (total, earned+unearned).

Wow. I know THAT'S never gonna happen!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dysfunctional press Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-17-09 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. i'd rather see the cap on wages removed.
btw- iirc, the cap is now over $100K.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC