After all these years, America has never fully recovered from Reaganomics. The degradation of society didn’t begin with fraudulent claims advertised by Reagan, he was merely the face of the propagandist that sold the most copies of the con job.
Not being an economist I won’t pretend to fully understand nor try to explain the detailed mathematics involved in some of the linked studies, but will try my best to accurately portray with the links provided, the ongoing damage that the long held “conservative” movements “Robber Baron” counterfeit economic platform has done to this country, its peoples human rights, the existential threat to democracy itself, and what can be done to begin its ending.
—By Erika Eichelberger| Wed May 28, 2014
We’ve known for many years why the vast majority of people have been “priced out” of political access to the democratic process. We’ve long felt the effects this high priced system promulgated by the “conservatives”. Over 35 years of real wage stagnation, while contrary to “conservative” claims about “over-taxed” corporations, the average person now carries a much larger proportion of taxes than corporations. By a lot. Dominance by a ruling few at the expense of the people diminishes America. We’ve also known what to do about these problems.
With every dollar that is stolen from the middle class, the Republicans cabal of deniers are systematically weakening America, subjugating its people and destroying the natural environment in the process as they extract profits in any form they see fit. And they are doing it to a purpose. The power to obtain and retain more power
One answer to begin reversing this weakening of America (?)
Tax the Rich as insurance against further damage to this country and our democracy. Aim to raise the top marginal tax rate to 90%. Just a bit lower that it was in the 1940’ - 50’s as the chart above indicates. Expert economists have done studies, produced working papers, and have been calling for this solution for years. And for years leading republican thinks tanks have been falsifying evidence and distorting the work of experts in the field of economics like Thomas Piketty to prove otherwise
by Ben Walsh @ HuffPo Business | Updated Oct 22, 2014
America has been doing income taxes wrong for more than 50 years.
All Americans, including the rich, would be better off if top tax rates went back to Eisenhower-era levels when the top federal income tax rate was 91 percent, according to a new working paper by Fabian Kindermann from the University of Bonn and Dirk Krueger from the University of Pennsylvania.
— emphasis added
Much like the GOP’s fossil fuel shilling agenda that denies Climate Change so goes the denial of facts when it comes to fiscal policies in this country.
with explanations covering each point — and that debunks every GOP claim to the contrrary
1) By one measure, U.S. income inequality is the highest it’s been since 1928
2) The U.S. is more unequal than most of its developed-world peers
3) The U.S. is more unequal than most of its developed-world peers
4) Americans are relatively unconcerned about the wide income gap between rich and poor
— NOTE: this is not actually a lack of concern, but a lack of information about how grotesquely unbalanced the system is, and how enormous the wealth and income gap has become: See the links to GOP deception
5) Wealth inequality is even greater than income inequality
Those are a few of the facts. Here are some more on this. Also directly debunking a few more GOP myths
April 24, 2012 by Chye-Ching Huang @ Center of Budget & Policy Priority
Very informative research by CBPP: this is only a small excerpt:
-
Small business. The evidence does not support the claim that raising top marginal income tax rates has a heavy impact on small business owners: a recent Treasury analysis finds that only 2.5 percent of small business owners fall into the top two income tax brackets and that these owners receive less than one-third of small business income. Moreover, even those small business owners who would be affected by tax increases on high-income households are unlikely to respond by reducing hiring or new investment. As Tax Policy Center co-director William Gale has noted:
- [T]he effective tax rate on small business income is likely to be zero or negative, regardless of small changes in the marginal tax rates. This is for three reasons.
- First, small businesses can expense (immediately deduct in full) the cost of investment. This alone brings the effective tax rate on new investment to zero, regardless of the statutory rate.
- Second, if they can finance the investment with debt, the interest payments would be tax deductible, making the effective tax rate negative.
- Third, they can deduct wage payments in full, so the marginal tax rate should have minimal impact on hiring.
..and only 1 percent of small business fall into the top one bracket.
And remember that wages paid are fully deductible as a business expense. Since the amount of labor needed to get the job done remains as a constant to the task at hand when producing a product, if anything, higher tax rates works as an incentive to hiring workers and raising wages to avoid the higher marginal tax rates with zero loss of profit.
So unraveling another “conservative” untruth that republican politicians just love to lie about - that small businesses suffer — the “job killing tax” lie that is
-
Entrepreneurship. CRS finds that “An extensive empirical literature on [the relationship between income tax rate increases and business formation] is mixed, but largely suggests that higher tax rates are more likely to encourage, rather than discourage, self-employment.”
And another fairy tale put out by the rwnj’s: that Ayn Rands objectivist John Galt’s of the world will simply refuse to do any brilliant“entrepreneur-ing” if taxes are raised.
Although I wish it WOULD drive Bill O’Reilly to make good on his promise to quit bloviating on air if his taxes were ever raised. But 1) Bill O’Reilly in Not rich enough to be in the top bracket and 2) He’d blather on to any one passing by if he was a penniless street bum.
Naked Capitalism has weighed in on this idea. (loaded with references)
Let’s play the devils advocate and imagine raising taxes does indeed act as a disincentive to those John Galt’s of society.
Posted on November 23, 2014 by Lambert Strether
Lambert here: Though I disagree with the thesis that taxes fund spending, I’ve always felt it would be a good thing to tax the rich heavily, for three reasons:
1) To prevent them from buying the political class and the government with their loose cash;
2) to prevent the formation of an aristocracy of inherited wealth...
Devil’s advocate (the 30% reduction is shown to be more like zero in other economists research — Kindermann, F and D Krueger — that is cited as source material by Lambert himself @ the bottom of this very article written by Lambert — but for the moment — go with it):
Reducing the incentives for the most productive people in society to put effort into generating income leads to a reduction in labour hours provided by the top 1% earners on the order of about 30%
But..
We live in a financialized economy; hence — I would argue — the top 1% earners come from the FIRE sector. If this is true, then the work the top 1% earners do is parasitical and destructive.
If we had high paying private equity firms doing 30% less work looting firms, or highly paid banksters doing 30% less work fleecing customers, or HFT boutiques doing 30% less work gaming the markets, then I think the economy would be better off, not worse.
Just because a tapeworm processes nutritive matter “productively” doesn’t mean tapeworms are productive for the body they inhabit.
So Naked Capitalism author Lambert Strether WAS playing a bit of Devil’s advocate after all:
So I’m quite dubious about the authors’ claims for a “contraction of aggregate activity” if top earners are taxed at Eisenhower rates. In fact, aggregate activity might return to rude health
He ends with this:
Conclusions and Limitations
Overall we find that increasing tax rates at the very top of the income distribution and thereby reducing tax burdens for the rest of the population is a suitable measure to increase social welfare. As a side effect, it reduces both income and wealth inequality within the US population.
Admittedly, our results apply with certain qualifications. First, taxing the top 1% more heavily will most certainly not work if these people can engage in heavy tax avoidance, make use of extensive tax loopholes, or just leave the country in response to a tax increase at the top.
So in addition to higher top marginal tax rates; close loopholes — aka — quit subsidizing the 1%ers with exclusive tax expenditures.
If that isn’t enough..
Here is one of the world’s richest men:
By Jon Greenberg on Sunday, May 17th, 2015
With a net worth in the neighborhood of $80 billion, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has no hesitation answering questions about what sort of economic policies the country should follow.
When he was asked this Sunday how he’d respond to those who think cuts in taxes and regulations will unleash productivity, Gates criticized the notion.
"The highest economic growth decade was the 1960s. Income tax rates were 90 percent,"
he said on CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS May 17, 2015.
"I mean, the idea that there's some direct connection that all these innovators are on strike because tax rates are at 35 percent on corporations, that's just such nonsense."
It’s high time this country’s people were relieved of the burden of Reaganomics. The supply side — trickle down economic fantasy based assault by the “conservative” movement that has plagued this country and hurt so many for way too many years
I say we make this a Big Fat f’cking issue that will not go away because we will not let it. Aim high, change the narrative to foster our goals and promote our values, and keeping pounding it home
And another thing that I’ve linked to before. Check out which Dem candidates top of the ticket to bottom, are fighting in this direction (tax reform comparisons) — it’s obvious to me what needs doing— let’s make it obvious to all — Save our country and democracy — Tax the Rich what they owe and then some