"Historically, higher taxes on the rich have correlated to higher growth."

S

superpunk

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,003
Reaction score
0
http://conceptualmath.org/philo/taxgrowth.htm

Warning - Math, graphs and charts. IOW facts.

In the last 50 years there were 5 tax cuts to the rich. Three of them were followed by a decline in GDP growth, 3 were followed by a decline in employment growth. The evidence suggests that tax cuts do not promote growth and probably promote decline.

In the last 50 years there was just one tax increase to the rich. After that tax increase both the GDP and employment growth rates increased significantly.

The historical evidence suggests that an economic decline will follow a tax cut to the rich, and economic growth may follow a tax increase to the rich. The evidence suggests that the optimum tax marginal tax rate on the rich is higher than 60%.
Keep reading...
 
dbair1967

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
55,107
Reaction score
6,196
Except that wasnt the case when Reagan ran the best 8 years of most of our lifetime
 
Bob Sacamano

Bob Sacamano

All-Pro
Messages
26,436
Reaction score
3
Didn't we cut taxes on big businesses during World War 2. Those who contributed to the war effort? If so, that probably brought around the biggest surge in our country's finances than ever before and seen since.
 
jeebus

jeebus

UDFA
Messages
1,650
Reaction score
0
superpunk said:
http://conceptualmath.org/philo/taxgrowth.htm

Warning - Math, graphs and charts. IOW facts.
Keep reading...
Maybe, but it is weird that I have heard a dozen economist say that there has been an increase in the amount of taxes taken in after every lowering of the tax rate.

Then you come with a shady site and a sh1t load of confusing graphs to say the exact opposite of the common understanding. Excuse me if I am skeptical, especially since you have the political wherewhithal of a 5 year old. (OBAMA KILLED, BINDER!!!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom