70_NPORT
Well-Known Member
Hand basket express, next stop Hell.
Old men w/hats now stronger than college freshhmen
- Thread starter Carmine
- Start date
MarPar
Meat Man with a Hat
I was going to post this response to a comment from 72Fury that was present earlier, but was apparently taken down before I finished my response. If I am recalling his comment earlier correctly, it was in response to my earlier post showing the wealth inequality in this country today and his reponse was along the lines that if "wealth redistribution" were undertaken in some form, the accumulated wealth of the rich would only be temporary before they would get their wealth back again. But since he took the post down, I will just say that I have heard the terms "wealth redistribution" as used in the temporary post and "class warfare" both come up time and time again by the extreme right wing media as soon as Bernie Sanders would start talking about higher taxes on the most wealthy people in our country and that media would say such a move was toward "Socialism" or "Communism". But I thought it would help to provide some perspective on what the tax rates have been in the past in this country and point out that the rates in the abbreviated charts below were during times when our country and our economy were in pretty good shape compared to today when we have massive budget deficits in mind boggling trillions of $$, the top 10% most wealthy people own 74% of the countries' wealth, a middle class that is disappearing, and the poor who are extremely desperate and own virtually nothing with attendant civil unrest and murders on a large scale, our infrastructure is overwhelmed and crumbling, many of our schools are pathetic and so on. There are of course other factors at play such as the cost of seemingly never ending wars affecting us as well, but taxation is probably the largest factor contributing to where we are today.
What Bernie Sanders was proposing in his campaign were adjustments to the tax rate for the wealthiest to be more consistent with the past in this country when it was running pretty well. Many conservatives have consistently used Ronald Reagan as their most revered President ever and it is generally true the economy was doing pretty well during his administration and America was still the world leader on most charts of economic indicators.
The goals of taxation in the U.S. in the past have been based on achieving a fair economy for everyone, where the rich still kept enough of their income to encourage capitalism to thrive and investors to be rewarded for their actions, and corporations to remain competitive in the work arena, but the poor were not living in poverty and the middle class was thriving, which when done right, optimized the health, wealth and overall well being of our country. Our infrastructure had enough money to be maintained, our schools were among the best in the world, health care was adequate, social security was secure and so on.
Before I go further, I would like you to estimate what you think the tax rate was in 1960 for the wealthiest individuals and keep that number in mind.
Here is an excerpt of our historical tax structure adjusted for inflation in 2013 $$ for all the charts (I will show the tax rate for the poorest individuals, the middle class (which I consider those who make around $70,000 per year in constant 2013 dollars) and the most wealthy for simplicity and all these numbers are for "married filing jointly" (there is a link to the reference I am using at the end of this post to fill in all the details of the other intermediate income ranges over time for those who care to look at this more in depth):
2013 (same today):
Tax Rate: Income Range
10% $0 - $17,488
25% $71,030 - $143,432
39.6% $440,876 and up
Taxes for the most wealthy have remained in the 28% - 39.6% range from 1987 - the present.
1986:
0% $0 - $7,688
28% $67,600 - 79,562
50% $367,120 and up
Taxes remained in the 50% range for the most wealthy from 1982 to 1986,
Ronald Reagan became President in 1981, and at the start of his administration these were the tax rates:
1981:
0% $0 - $8588
32% $62,134 - $75,521
70% $544,054 and up
(The tax rate for the wealthiest stayed constant at 70% from 1965 to 1981!)
1963:
And I recall in 1963 when I was a senior in high school and President Kennedy was assainated while in office, our economy and country as a whole were doing pretty well then too despite the cold war with Russia still going on. Here were the tax rates at that time:
0% $0 - $30,012
26% $60,025 - $90,037
91% $3,001,229 and up
And the tax rate for the wealthiest was at 91% between approximately 1946 - 1963!
I would wager that few if any realized what the past rates of taxation really were in this country. And we were not deemed a "socialist" country then and someone like Bernie striving to return to a better balance of taxation for the overall well being of the country should not be called a Socialist or Communist for his proposal to raise taxes primarily on the most wealthy either.
So it looks like our situation in this country will either remain pretty much the same mess it is today under a Hillary Clinton presidency since Wall Street has been very good to her and under Donald Trump, you can make your own estimation what will happen if he lowers the tax on the wealthiest incomes to 33% (he raised it from 25% in his first proposal) from the current 39.6% as he proposed very recently and to whether he would really solve our problems and make America Great Again, and whether he is really out there of the well-being of the middle class for a change? All I can say for sure, is that under his proposal, he and similar individuals would get another significant tax break in their lifetime.
I just ask you to think about the gradual erosion of taxes for the rich primarily since World War 2 as the result of decades of increasing lobbying of politicians by the wealthy to reduce their taxes more and more (and those of the politicians too) and in return pay for their campaigns for reelection among other perks. And I don't recall that any Republican candidate during the primaries suggesting that taxes for the wealthy be increased - but many of them proposed that we cut "entitlements" (whatever that term means since I know that I at least paid into both all my working life of 42 years?) such as Social Security and Medicare to balance our budget instead!. In order to really make America great again, there was only one candidate with any real will to make tax changes on the wealthy, and now he has been put aside by the Establishment and the ignorance of the public which is in general not vigilant about what is really going on and our past history.
This is the data site I referenced:
What Bernie Sanders was proposing in his campaign were adjustments to the tax rate for the wealthiest to be more consistent with the past in this country when it was running pretty well. Many conservatives have consistently used Ronald Reagan as their most revered President ever and it is generally true the economy was doing pretty well during his administration and America was still the world leader on most charts of economic indicators.
The goals of taxation in the U.S. in the past have been based on achieving a fair economy for everyone, where the rich still kept enough of their income to encourage capitalism to thrive and investors to be rewarded for their actions, and corporations to remain competitive in the work arena, but the poor were not living in poverty and the middle class was thriving, which when done right, optimized the health, wealth and overall well being of our country. Our infrastructure had enough money to be maintained, our schools were among the best in the world, health care was adequate, social security was secure and so on.
Before I go further, I would like you to estimate what you think the tax rate was in 1960 for the wealthiest individuals and keep that number in mind.
Here is an excerpt of our historical tax structure adjusted for inflation in 2013 $$ for all the charts (I will show the tax rate for the poorest individuals, the middle class (which I consider those who make around $70,000 per year in constant 2013 dollars) and the most wealthy for simplicity and all these numbers are for "married filing jointly" (there is a link to the reference I am using at the end of this post to fill in all the details of the other intermediate income ranges over time for those who care to look at this more in depth):
2013 (same today):
Tax Rate: Income Range
10% $0 - $17,488
25% $71,030 - $143,432
39.6% $440,876 and up
Taxes for the most wealthy have remained in the 28% - 39.6% range from 1987 - the present.
1986:
0% $0 - $7,688
28% $67,600 - 79,562
50% $367,120 and up
Taxes remained in the 50% range for the most wealthy from 1982 to 1986,
Ronald Reagan became President in 1981, and at the start of his administration these were the tax rates:
1981:
0% $0 - $8588
32% $62,134 - $75,521
70% $544,054 and up
(The tax rate for the wealthiest stayed constant at 70% from 1965 to 1981!)
1963:
And I recall in 1963 when I was a senior in high school and President Kennedy was assainated while in office, our economy and country as a whole were doing pretty well then too despite the cold war with Russia still going on. Here were the tax rates at that time:
0% $0 - $30,012
26% $60,025 - $90,037
91% $3,001,229 and up
And the tax rate for the wealthiest was at 91% between approximately 1946 - 1963!
I would wager that few if any realized what the past rates of taxation really were in this country. And we were not deemed a "socialist" country then and someone like Bernie striving to return to a better balance of taxation for the overall well being of the country should not be called a Socialist or Communist for his proposal to raise taxes primarily on the most wealthy either.
So it looks like our situation in this country will either remain pretty much the same mess it is today under a Hillary Clinton presidency since Wall Street has been very good to her and under Donald Trump, you can make your own estimation what will happen if he lowers the tax on the wealthiest incomes to 33% (he raised it from 25% in his first proposal) from the current 39.6% as he proposed very recently and to whether he would really solve our problems and make America Great Again, and whether he is really out there of the well-being of the middle class for a change? All I can say for sure, is that under his proposal, he and similar individuals would get another significant tax break in their lifetime.
I just ask you to think about the gradual erosion of taxes for the rich primarily since World War 2 as the result of decades of increasing lobbying of politicians by the wealthy to reduce their taxes more and more (and those of the politicians too) and in return pay for their campaigns for reelection among other perks. And I don't recall that any Republican candidate during the primaries suggesting that taxes for the wealthy be increased - but many of them proposed that we cut "entitlements" (whatever that term means since I know that I at least paid into both all my working life of 42 years?) such as Social Security and Medicare to balance our budget instead!. In order to really make America great again, there was only one candidate with any real will to make tax changes on the wealthy, and now he has been put aside by the Establishment and the ignorance of the public which is in general not vigilant about what is really going on and our past history.
This is the data site I referenced:
Last edited:
72Fury
Senior Member
I was commenting on Carmine's post. I thought it was really good & echoed many of my thoughts.
I'd agree with much on yours. I'm not a fan of either candidate. Both are terrible. Have you ever been to a Bernie Sander's rally? He came near me. Free everything. Free college (sorry on this one I busted my balls working on pig farm, cutting grass, etc paying for mine). Free healthcare. We are going to level the playing field and make the rich pay. You know what happens after we run out of rich guys? We come after the rest of us. Too many entitlements. Can't & won't stop. The focus needs to be on raising the percentage of people not working, to working. Problem is they don't & won't work.
I'd agree with much on yours. I'm not a fan of either candidate. Both are terrible. Have you ever been to a Bernie Sander's rally? He came near me. Free everything. Free college (sorry on this one I busted my balls working on pig farm, cutting grass, etc paying for mine). Free healthcare. We are going to level the playing field and make the rich pay. You know what happens after we run out of rich guys? We come after the rest of us. Too many entitlements. Can't & won't stop. The focus needs to be on raising the percentage of people not working, to working. Problem is they don't & won't work.
MarPar
Meat Man with a Hat
70_NPORT
Well-Known Member
not crazy about bernie and would never vote for the guy; BUT he got screwed by his own party.....says alot.
I guess my last post was too complex for some guys. You won't get good jobs if very few people are available for the jobs industry needs because it is too expensive to go to college, we won't get much new manufacturing if our infrastructure is crumbling, you won't get more new jobs here if businesses can't sell to a non-existent middle class anymore to buy their products, and healthcare will continue to be on an expensive for everyone emergency room proposition when someone gets sick because they can't afford preventative healthcare coverage. And our schools don't teach vocational training routinely anymore because they don't have the money, so that even getting a job as a plumber or auto technicain will be difficult if you don't have the competence to do such jobs since you don't have a college degree for the jobs industry needs filled. The point of my above post is simply that when the wealthy pay a fair share of their income to support all these kinds of necessary activities and programs, the economy works as it was designed to do in previous generations. But the public in general doesn't see the big picture anymore, and their thinking just delves into the platitudes that the right wing media put out there to brainwash the public into leaving the status quo in place, which is the rich just get richer and the middle class and the poor just keep losing, and the jobs along with it. At some point we have to be smart enough to plan a way out of this downward spiral. And if you think Trump, based on his published policies (or Hillary) will lead us out of this mess, I believe you are very wrong. Other countries that are thriving do have affordable access to higher education, a national health care system that covers everyone, and reasonable rates of taxes on the wealthy.
The overall point of my too long last post was that in the past we had exceptionally high taxes on the wealthy, and we didn't run out of rich people because there were still incentives left for them to lead good lives and create new sources of wealth and our nation flourished. And now their ranks are insanely rich now, not less, only because their tax rates are stupidly low for the well being of our country overall. The middle class and poor are now just chumps for them when you look at the past and so many people's voting is based on what the media tell them they should do rather than really thinking and analyzing what is going on and fixing it.
People need to get off their phones 24/7 and spend less time in Facebook and stop watching news programs and outlets owned by the very rich to brainwash the public into continuing to support the increasing cash flow to the top 1 percenters at their own expense. People need to do their own analytical thinking, look at the big picture and look for real solutions, not let greedy, rich owners of media and others do their thinking for them. Our real problems aren't mostly the guys coming across our southern border, or the destitute trying to survive on food stamps - those kinds of issues are the result of our failed and failing policies. Building walls and giving more tax breaks to the wealthy and blaming this all on the illegal mexicans and destitue welfare "takers" just misses the real problems and makes everything worse. And promoting anger to raise the media's ratings and profits rather than promoting real thinking just depreciates us all.
The overall point of my too long last post was that in the past we had exceptionally high taxes on the wealthy, and we didn't run out of rich people because there were still incentives left for them to lead good lives and create new sources of wealth and our nation flourished. And now their ranks are insanely rich now, not less, only because their tax rates are stupidly low for the well being of our country overall. The middle class and poor are now just chumps for them when you look at the past and so many people's voting is based on what the media tell them they should do rather than really thinking and analyzing what is going on and fixing it.
People need to get off their phones 24/7 and spend less time in Facebook and stop watching news programs and outlets owned by the very rich to brainwash the public into continuing to support the increasing cash flow to the top 1 percenters at their own expense. People need to do their own analytical thinking, look at the big picture and look for real solutions, not let greedy, rich owners of media and others do their thinking for them. Our real problems aren't mostly the guys coming across our southern border, or the destitute trying to survive on food stamps - those kinds of issues are the result of our failed and failing policies. Building walls and giving more tax breaks to the wealthy and blaming this all on the illegal mexicans and destitue welfare "takers" just misses the real problems and makes everything worse. And promoting anger to raise the media's ratings and profits rather than promoting real thinking just depreciates us all.
When the rich paid their fair share of taxes in the past, our country did and continued to work well, and it was a Democracy. So why would doing what we did in the past now make us a socialist country then? I didn't say anything in that post about health care for all, or making college more affordable - the subject was limited to tax rates in our country over time. Or maybe you were just replying to the post by 72Fury and not commenting on mine just above.
Last edited:
Exactly ! None of this "free" stuff is free, somebody has to pay for it.
Here's an idea, how about taxing the owning of old cars. B.O. can appoint an Old Car Czar who will assess a value on any car over 25 years old, and the owner has to pay a 90% tax on that value every year, plus there would be a mileage tax, based on a government specified GPS that you would have to buy for each old car, of 50 cents per mile. Also if you were caught driving without the GPS, or without it functioning there would be a $50,000 fine for each occurrence up to 3, then there would be a mandatory jail sentence of 3 years. This tax would be applied to ALL old cars registered or not. If the car is titled in your name you would have to pay the tax.
After all, if you can afford an old car then you must have some disposable income, so the government will help you dispose of it.
The Horvaths
Young man with a cowboy hat
Jeez Cantflip how'd you get into this account?
I heard your complaints, now what are your solutions then?
I also worked while going to college, and I made it - but it was also much more affordable then.
By the way, is Social Security an "entitlement" to you or because one has to pay into it is it maybe something else? That term is used many different ways. But that term, we can both agree probably, does apply to many of today's youth who are pampered by there parents and taught nothing about responsibility and discipline.
Agreed, and Trump almost got screwed by his own party too. But the public spoke more loudly than the Republican establishment could overcome. The nations' democrats did not, but many tried including me.
MarPar
Meat Man with a Hat
sorry, I should have quoted 72's post so as not to confuse.
btw, we as a country are a Republic, not a democracy...
and you are most correct-if everybody pays their "fair" share, our Country would do well. but then again, there weren't almost half the populous sucking off of the govt tit back then like we have now. and back then we were not socialistic, because everybody did it on their own, individually. the people had control of their own lives, not the govt. when govt exerts control over major aspects of peoples' lives, that's socialism/communism. (heathcare for example)
if those on welfare would be working, we would have almost double the tax base we have now, and would not be spending BILLIONS to support people looking for a hand out and not a hand up. welfare is supposed to be temporary, but some in our society have made it a career choice.
and regarding my 2nd or 3rd comment in this thread about capitalism being a bad word nowadays...I was not agreeing with it in the sense that it actually is, more that people for years have been pushing an ideology that making money for oneself is dirty and immoral, which it definitely is not.
oh and for the record, I do not agree with The Bern's ideas, but he did get the royal screw job from the DNC.
70bigblockdodge
Old Man with a Hat
Where is my free stuff?
Fratzog
Old Man with a Hat
republic
- : a country that is governed by elected representatives and by an elected leader (such as a president) rather than by a king or queen
- : a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
You're all fools if you believe that more than 20% of the adult population can actualy carry on an intelligent conversation on this subject at the level this is being discussed here right now.
The Horvaths
Young man with a cowboy hat
The US is a representative democracy.
I agree that the distribution of wealth in the US is out of wack; However, I don't think the proper solution is achieved through the tax code or giving stuff to Bernie's "Free (stuff) Army." I believe the best solution is what had worked in this country for a couple hundred years but no longer exists, or if it does only as a shadow of it's former self. That solution is capitalism.
Take for example William Durant. He co-founded Chevy and GM. He had a good Idea, worked hard and was rewarded by becoming one of the richest people in America. In the late 20's and 30's he thought he had a better idea. He didn't and paid the price, becoming a person of " modest" financial standing.
Compare this to modern "Crony-ism." It started in the 70's with bailing out banks that made bad loans in South America, our beloved Ma, and others. This intervention usually took the form of loan guarantees that forced the companies to turn things around and become profitable again.
It reached a new level in the 90's with LTCM and went "total insanity" with the bail-out of the investment bankers that caused so much damage/pain to so many people. The people in charge of running these companies into the ground and their stockholders paid no price for their follies. They were not taken to court, thrown out of their jobs or had their investment portfolios crushed. Instead they got continued employment and multi-million $ bonuses. Meanwhile, the people that were now upside down on their houses and unemployed were forced to pay the bill and carry the burden.
Take for example William Durant. He co-founded Chevy and GM. He had a good Idea, worked hard and was rewarded by becoming one of the richest people in America. In the late 20's and 30's he thought he had a better idea. He didn't and paid the price, becoming a person of " modest" financial standing.
Compare this to modern "Crony-ism." It started in the 70's with bailing out banks that made bad loans in South America, our beloved Ma, and others. This intervention usually took the form of loan guarantees that forced the companies to turn things around and become profitable again.
It reached a new level in the 90's with LTCM and went "total insanity" with the bail-out of the investment bankers that caused so much damage/pain to so many people. The people in charge of running these companies into the ground and their stockholders paid no price for their follies. They were not taken to court, thrown out of their jobs or had their investment portfolios crushed. Instead they got continued employment and multi-million $ bonuses. Meanwhile, the people that were now upside down on their houses and unemployed were forced to pay the bill and carry the burden.
Once again Stan, you are so correct. We are doomed, and the enemy is our own ignorant and lazy selves that refuse to do our own thinking rather than just incoherently parrot the junk we are fed mindlessly by the very people screwing us. Sometimes the outcome of continual success is eventual failure. People are now "entitled" to their own anger and freedom to complain endlessly, without any responsibility to really seek solutions. I am glad I wasn't born any later. Lastly, I will just say that what I truly believe is that the root of all our problems evolve from spiritual emptiness and putting God aside. We reap what we sow.
Last edited:
