Discussion in 'Politics' started by Flaylo, Apr 26, 2012.
Jared Bernstein: The Economic Impact of Raising Taxes on High-Income Households
Big time rich people are going to continue to do well no matter what the tax code is. The middle class, not so much.
Lets see your source and that wasn't written by HP, they hotlinked it from another site.
.....as-well-as Bill Clinton's....
The nation's most sustained economic growth was during the postwar years when taxes were over 70% on the highest bracket.
Tax money was used - along with other policies - to strengthen the economic solvency of the middle class. For example, when you use tax dollars to subsidize education, the effect is that middle class families have more money for consumption. When they spend more, the capitalist is forced to add jobs. It's called a virtuous cycle.
What Republicans don't understand is that the market will not pay workers enough to consume and drive the domestic economy. Walmart wants sweatshop labor costs - which is why they get all their manufacturing labor from China. Therefore you need a combination of tax and after-market policies to strengthen middle class demand. America's greatest economic growth occurred when we understood this logic. Unfortunately, special interests clogged the information system and convinced us to get rid of the middle class. Now there is not enough consumption to justify adding jobs. It's a toxic cycle.
glad to see you coming to your senses
.....Not-to-mention.....Education being a LONG-TERM inve$tment (in our Country).....a concept long-ago lost, during the greed of the Bush Years.
My property taxes have been soaring 6 times faster than the economy. I am not rich. Gas taxes have jumped, people who drive to work are not rich. Stop using your tax the rich rhetoric to tax the poor.
There's a fatal flaw in this piece. When he states "In other words, any negative impact on economic growth from increasing taxes on high-income people would be more than offset by the positive effects of using the resulting revenue gain to reduce the budget deficit"
Let's for a moment assume he's correct, that an increase in the tax rates would result in an increase in revenue. While there's lots of evidence to suggest the exact opposite would be the case, let's pretend he's right about revenue going up after a tax rate increase.
The problem is that spending is so out of control that no tax rate increase could possibly produce enough additional revenue to actually REDUCE the deficit, much less our debt. The automatic increases planned in federal spending will far outweigh any increase in revenue, thereby further increasing deficits and debt. Hell, we could CONFISCATE all assets from America's richest citizens and we still couldn't close this year's deficit, much less attack the debt we've compiled. Bottom line, with the spending we're currently planning, a tax rate increase is not going to "reduce the budget deficit". No fucking way.
Besides, as Washington has shown us again and again, any time they get more revenue, it is never used to reduce the deficit, it is spent. Always!
So, I tell you what, you support real REDUCTIONS in federal spending now (not some future promise) and I'll support increasing taxes to help pay off debt. Deal?
Separate names with a comma.