High taxes help the economy.

[.... callchet ....]

High taxes have always helped the economy. Everybody had jobs and the nation improved its infrastructure as well the economy. As the nation became

affluent, it also became complacent and let the system guard down. Unions lost status because it was thought that they weren't needed as the nation

became more affluent. Deregulation ripped apart all the safeguards that let the economy and nation get strong. This led to tax breaks that led to

taking money out of the system. Rich people had all the spending money that they wanted, so now they just hoarded money. All the factors that

brought affluence did not ;t bring any checks to upgrade our industrial system so we could compete on the world markets.All our mills and plants and

factories were obsolete compared to the rest of the world. So now there is less money in the system and jobs floating overseas. The present situation

has our standard of living deteriorating drastically and more money being taken out of the stem and stashed in personal fortunes. Tax increases build

jobs and help the poor. Tax breaks loose jobs because the US , state , county and city governments loose money and have to cut jobs. The upper class

saves the money and amasses fortunes. Tax breaks bad. Tax increases good.

Needs to be Progressive on taxable income above $250k .

[jwirr]

1. I think it depended on who was being taxed. The middle class cannot

carry the whole load alone.

[.... callchet ....]

3. Lie Obama promised , over $250K, but like he didn't say

also needs to be progressive.

[backscatter712]

4. Agree. This is why we have progressive taxation.

Right now, the tax brackets for a single person are:

0 - 8,025: 10%
8,025 - 32,550 15%
32,550 - 78,850 25%
78,850 - 164,550 28%
164,550 - 357,700 33%
357,700+ 35%

If you ask me, it should look more like:

0 - 8,025: 10%
8,025 - 32,550 15%
32,550 - 78,850 25%
78,850 - 164,550 30%
164,550 - 357,700 40%
357,700 - 1,000,000 50%
1,000,000+ 65%

We could balance the budget, pay for things like the economic stimulus, universal health care, fixed infrastructure, rebuilt schools etc. etc. etc. and have plenty to spare. The only reason we don't do this is because the rich fuckers who are bleeding this country dry have good lobbyists and lots of money for campaign contributions.

[.... callchet ....]

5. Why didn't you use the 1944, 1945 rates that has a high bracket of 94%

[backscatter712]

9. Ironically, the Laffer Curve.

Just stealing from the Reaganomics con-men.

Drawing up the Laffer Curve, the Rethugs would have you think that point t*, the maxima of government revenue, on the curve occurs at a tax rate of 2 percent, and every time you raise taxes, you lower government revenue.

The real truth is that if you take the righttardery out of the curve, you'll probably find that t* occurs at a point closer to 65%, or even higher, so that's the top tax rate I picked.

[Lagomorph]

12. One for you, two for me?

Why bother making the effort? They still have to work for it. I'd cap it at 50%

[Taverner]

2. Tax the rich!

Tax production and consumption

[.... callchet ....]

6. A very good example of taxes helping is in the government.

All workers in local and state service position like road departments, sewage , etc all developed into good family supporting jobs. Now as the economy

tanks, these jobs will all be hurt due to loss of revenue. And they will be lost into a hyper saturated job seeking environment.

[Township75]

7. Well if people believe this...

shouldn't they send more money to the govt over which they are being taxed? If you truly believe this, then do it, and enjoy the return of your investment.

[.... callchet ....]

10. are you afraid to say the words " Tax the Rich " ?

The ones who can afford it .

[originalpckelly]

8. 1% of the population is 3 million people, that's more than 535 in Congress...

Ultimately, we need to make the number of people controlling the economy larger than 1%, not smaller by giving more money for 535 people to control.

So if wealth is concentrated at the top in 1%, that's more people making decisions with that money than 535.

[.... callchet ....]

11. The top 1% have always been in control.

Do you not see the results of the the self interested in control ?