Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

In the days of FDR and Truman and Eisenhower tax rates were at 90%

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
 
Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-27-09 09:28 AM
Original message
In the days of FDR and Truman and Eisenhower tax rates were at 90%
for the very wealthy. Does anyone know how and when those rates came into being and would it be unhealthy for our economy to go back to the very much lowered rates of JFK?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
goddess40 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-27-09 09:35 AM
Response to Original message
1. It was for the very wealthy
And funny but the movie stars and the doctors in our town could still build their big mansions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-27-09 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
2. -->
Year/Rate/TMTR/On amount over $

1913 7 500,000
1914 7 500,000
1915 7 500,000
1916 15 2,000,000
1917 67 2,000,000
1918 77 1,000,000
1919 73 1,000,000
1920 73 1,000,000
1921 73 1,000,000
1922 58 200,000
1923 43.5 200,000
1924 46 500,000
1925 25 100,000
1926 25 100,000
1927 25 100,000
1928 25 100,000
1929 24 100,000
1930 25 100,000
1931 25 100,000
1932 63 1,000,000
1933 63 1,000,000
1934 63 1,000,000
1935 63 1,000,000
1936 79 5,000,000
1937 79 5,000,000
1938 79 5,000,000
1939 79 5,000,000
1940 81.1 5,000,000
1941 81 5,000,000
1942 88 200,000
1943 88 200,000
1944 94 <2> 200,000
1945 94 <2> 200,000
1946 86.45 <3> 200,000
1947 86.45 <3> 200,000
1948 82.13 <4> 400,000
1949 82.13 <4> 400,000
1950 84.36 400,000
1951 91 <5> 400,000
1952 92 <6> 400,000
1953 92 <6> 400,000
1954 91 <7> 400,000
1955 91 <7> 400,000
1956 91 <7> 400,000
1957 91 <7> 400,000
1958 91 <7> 400,000
1959 91 <7> 400,000
1960 91 <7> 400,000
1961 91 <7> 400,000
1962 91 <7> 400,000
1963 91 <7> 400,000
1964 77 400,000
1965 70 200,000
1966 70 200,000
1967 70 200,000
1968 75.25 200,000
1969 77 200,000
1970 71.75 200,000
1971 70 60 200,000
1972 70 50 200,000
1973 70 50 200,000
1974 70 50 200,000
1975 70 50 200,000
1976 70 50 200,000
1977 70 50 203,200
1978 70 50 203,200
1979 70 50 215,400
1980 70 50 215,400
1981 69.125 50 215,400
1982 50 85,600
1983 50 109,400
1984 50 162,400
1985 50 169,020
1986 50 175,250
1987 38.5 90,000
1988 28 <8> 29,750 <8>
1989 28 <8> 30,950 <8>
1990 28 <8> 32,450 <8>
1991 31 82,150
1992 31 86,500
1993 39.6 89,150
1994 39.6 250,000
1995 39.6 256,500
1996 39.6 263,750
1997 39.6 271,050
1998 39.6 278,450
1999 39.6 283,150
2000 39.6 288,350
2001 39.1 297,350
2002 38.6 307,050
2003 35 311,950

http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-27-09 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
3. Yep, and economic growth rates were HIGH.
FDR: Somehow, we managed.
ER: Where there's a will, there's a way.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kansas Wyatt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-27-09 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
4. 90% taxes or invest your earnings back into the economy.
That is the point everyone is missing. Republicans keep saying the rich will no longer invest in the economy if taxes were raised.

But, what they fail to tell anyone is that the rich will choose to invest a lot more money back into the economy, to retain ownership and/or determine where their tax money is spent. When they invest back into the economy, it creates job growth, instead of paying lower taxes and investing into money market gimmick funds that do nothing for the economy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hadrons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-27-09 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
5. And people were still working to be "rich" too ....
somehow that tax-bracket DIDN'T discourage people from earning more money
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 Thu Dec 26th 2024, 03:09 PM
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