Check this chart of top marginal taxes for decades

[Avatar4321]

Hoover increased taxes, how did that era work out?

He was also a Progressive. But shhhh. He had an R next to his name. That's whats important.

I was actually unaware that he ran for President in 1920 as well. The Republicans wouldnt nominate him because it was very unclear whether he was a Republican or Democrat. Heck, a number of Democrat primaries wanted him on the Democrat ticket then.

History is an interesting thing. It can turn heroes to villians and Villians to heroes. Just depends on who is telling the story and what part of their life you are looking at.

 

[Avatar4321]

Even if it was proven by God himself that taxes should be that high, government does not have anymore right to my money than Jesse James did others, I would have no incentive to even work if 90% of what I labored for was taken from me.

Then you dont like this democray and you can go elswhere

I don't like Democracy. Which is why I want to Restore the Republic.

 

[Avatar4321]

The obvious ones, when a depression hits and taxes are lowered, there is economic growth. When a Depression hits and taxes are raised there is a longer depression.

Maybe we should stop raising taxes and driving people with money to other locations and simply encourage them to spend their money in the US.

You are a loser because you posted this nonsense that these facts I provided did not bare out.

Go get the historical evidence that we have had two depressions let alone that what you say is proven by history.

Depression of 1920?21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is that satisfactory?

There is a reason this one is forgotten. It's because the people in charge did the right thing and cut taxes and spending and let the people work.

 

[syrenn]

Even if it was proven by God himself that taxes should be that high, government does not have anymore right to my money than Jesse James did others, I would have no incentive to even work if 90% of what I labored for was taken from me.

Then you dont like this democray and you can go elswhere

You mean YOU don't like it. Please feel free to move to pakistan.

 

[syrenn]

let tax the wealthy ( if you want to make it 400,000 a year fine) 91% again , it seemed to work prettty damned well.

What the fuck are you providing for facts TM? That you can look at a chart or a graph and come to your opinion and then claim it’s a fact? Just because you have 91% possible tax rate does not mean even a single person will be taxed 91%... DEDUCTIONS! Reagan was known from making the tax code a little more simple by bringing taxes more around what people would end up paying.

And BTW TM….
Hoooooolllly shit you are the dumbest person on the internet....

 

[Yurt]

The obvious ones, when a depression hits and taxes are lowered, there is economic growth. When a Depression hits and taxes are raised there is a longer depression.

Maybe we should stop raising taxes and driving people with money to other locations and simply encourage them to spend their money in the US.

You are a loser because you posted this nonsense that these facts I provided did not bare out.

Go get the historical evidence that we have had two depressions let alone that what you say is proven by history.

Depression of 1920?21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is that satisfactory?

There is a reason this one is forgotten. It's because the people in charge did the right thing and cut taxes and spending and let the people work.

good one

 

[DiamondDave]

let tax the wealthy ( if you want to make it 400,000 a year fine) 91% again , it seemed to work prettty damned well.

Then you suport selective equality??

Can we bring it to the legal system, employment law, housing, and everything else??

Nah... I'll stick to supporting systems based on freedom and equal treatment.... not this Robin Hood bullshit of the greedy entitlement junkies

I'll ask it again for you to state it one way or another...

Do you then support selective equal treatment built in to the governmental system?

C'mon TM... I'll keep asking

 

[loosecannon]

Top US Marginal Income Tax Rates, 1913--2003 (TruthAndPolitics.org)


What pattern jumps out at you?

That the lower the tax is the better the economy is doing?

Did you even look at your own link?

 

[loosecannon]

the two historic lows were followed by a economic collapse.

Yes they were,but they were also concurrent with an economic bonanza.

Meanwhile in reality correlation doesn't equal causation.

The stats provided alone do not prove that either the bonanza or the bust had anything to do with causing the boom and bust.

Think of the economy like you would any complex organism: if you drink two glasses of milk and then you catch a cold, did the milk cause the cold or not?

Answer: not.

 

[Avorysuds]

TM...

Hoover/FDR. The Unemployment President | Jim Powell | Cato Institute: Commentary


Harding/Coolidge. 1920s Income Tax Cuts Sparked Economic Growth and Raised Federal Revenues | Veronique de Rugy | Cato Institute: Daily Commentary

This is not fucking rocket science.

You know TM, I got into Coolidge/Harding because I read up about them. I like you was under the impression FDR was most awesomest fool eva in the White House, so I figured I’d take a look. Look at the policies starting from about 1910 up to 1950.

How is it possible that for near 10 years the economy was awesome? Why were poor people making their way up and the country was moving full force ahead despite JUST coming out of a depression… Then BAM, another recession happens and Hoover does a polar opposite of “letting thing be” and starts massive programs and raises taxes… Next thing we know we are in a depression… FDR for THREEE terms AFTER Hoovers 4 year team can’t seem to get the economy out of the gutter, in fact things just kept getting worse and worse…

Then, as I’m sure you hate a war happens, and guess who goes and dies on the front lines? The poor. Now Unemployment shrinks because the US population is shrinking TM, and then you grab your pom-poms and cheer it on.

 

[California Girl]

Top US Marginal Income Tax Rates, 1913--2003 (TruthAndPolitics.org)


What pattern jumps out at you?

Your posts are crap

That was the pattern that jumped out at me.

However, when I analyzed further, I found a secondary pattern.... the "I don't have a clue what I'm talking about" pattern.

Therefore, research shows that truthmatters is in fact, an idiot, and a liar.

 

[California Girl]

Dear fucking idiot , the ideas you agreed to with this loser avatar

I get the impression that this is meant to be some insult towards me. But since it makes no sense, I could easily be wrong.

Don't worry TM. I still enjoy your posts.

So, you prefer fiction.

 

[8537]

The obvious ones, when a depression hits and taxes are lowered, there is economic growth. When a Depression hits and taxes are raised there is a longer depression.

Maybe we should stop raising taxes and driving people with money to other locations and simply encourage them to spend their money in the US.

You are a loser because you posted this nonsense that these facts I provided did not bare out.

Go get the historical evidence that we have had two depressions let alone that what you say is proven by history.

Depression of 1920?21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is that satisfactory?

There is a reason this one is forgotten. It's because the people in charge did the right thing and cut taxes and spending and let the people work.

The 1920/1 recession was not solved by "cutting taxes and reducing spending". In fact, tax rates did not change until the middle of 1923. Government spending declined b/c the war and associated costs ended. Despite Austrian wishes to make it so, there is no example to be found of an economy rebounding in a low interest environment thanks to fiscal austerity. That bears repeating: No examples of an economy rebounding in a low-interest environment thanks to fiscal austerity.

The 1920/1 recession was caused, firstly, by a quite predictable demand shock after World War 1 + a host of interest rate hikes by the newbie Federal Reserve. The massive government layoffs related with this event made it far worse, contrary to the claim that they solved the recession (the layoffs happened before and during the dip, not as the economy rebounded.

The Fed, quite belatedly, responded in the proper manner - it dramatically reduced interest rates to increase the money supply (20 years later, they would forget this lesson). The economy also benefitted from a significant supply shock related to rebuilding and re-establishing trade with Europe.

 

[8537]

FDR for THREEE terms AFTER Hoovers 4 year team can’t seem to get the economy out of the gutter, in fact things just kept getting worse and worse…

I will never understand why people say this. Things did not "just keep getting worse and worse". "Things" improved - dramatically - in the months and years after FDR took office. The Banking act halted bank failures and brought an end to panics and runs, dropping the number of failures from 3000+ the year before it was passed to something like 7 the year after. If people don't understand the impact of this, they need to do more research. Prior to that reform, there could be no private investment because no one trusted financial institutions with their money.

Further, FDR took office in the face of an economy that had lost about 40% of its production. In the four years following his inauguration, the economy grew at record pace. Unemployment fell by over 30 percent.

There was another recession in 1937/8, but the economy quickly rebounded.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Interesting.

$100,000 in 1925 is $1,250,000 in 2010 dollars. We have no tax bracket now that begins at that level.

Yeah....seeing-as-how they take such a major tax-hit at $1M......

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wDdWJcpJj0]YouTube - Maddow: GOP plan to extend tax cuts for the rich[/ame]


....we definitely need a new-and-improved rate for those folks makin' $1,250,000.

​

 

[topspin]

yes year by year the Big Gov lowers what it calls high income and thereby can confiscate a huge portion of it. thanks

 

[johnrocks]

Why do so many wrap their lips around big government, that is what amazes me. It's as if they look upon it as their God or something, willing to work their entire life and keep only 10% since their Lord and Master needs the other 90%.

 

[DiamondDave]

Interesting.

$100,000 in 1925 is $1,250,000 in 2010 dollars. We have no tax bracket now that begins at that level.

Yeah....seeing-as-how they take such a major tax-hit at $1M......

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wDdWJcpJj0]YouTube - Maddow: GOP plan to extend tax cuts for the rich[/ame]


....we definitely need a new-and-improved rate for those folks makin' $1,250,000.

​

No.. we need 1 rate, on every dollar earned, by every citizen... that is unless you believe in unequal treatment by the government

 

[DiamondDave]

let tax the wealthy ( if you want to make it 400,000 a year fine) 91% again , it seemed to work prettty damned well.

Then you suport selective equality??

Can we bring it to the legal system, employment law, housing, and everything else??

Nah... I'll stick to supporting systems based on freedom and equal treatment.... not this Robin Hood bullshit of the greedy entitlement junkies

I'll ask it again for you to state it one way or another...

Do you then support selective equal treatment built in to the governmental system?

C'mon TM... I'll keep asking

 

[Avatar4321]

Dear fucking idiot , the ideas you agreed to with this loser avatar

I get the impression that this is meant to be some insult towards me. But since it makes no sense, I could easily be wrong.

Don't worry TM. I still enjoy your posts.

So, you prefer fiction.

I do. But more seriously, I enjoy TM's posts. It's interesting to watch. I am fascinated by how humans think and act. Sometimes i think I should have become a psychologist just because i enjoy it so much.