Economy

Rant

Lets Return to Reagan Era Tax Policies!

Posted 11 months ago|9 comments|525 views
Written by
Altruist
Eugene, OR
Everyone knows that Republicans cut taxes and Democrats raise taxes, so it would make sense wouldn't it, to return to the tax policies of the Republican President that conservatives holds most dear?

The problem is that these conservatives deal more in mythology than in facts. Lets compare Obama's tax record against Reagan's.

While governor of California. Reagan looked more like a tax and spend liberal. Reagan "signed into law the largest tax increase in the history of any state up till then." Meanwhile, state spending nearly doubled.

As President, Reagan raised taxes 11 times in 7 out of 8 years. Reagan also vastly increased the size of the Federal Government and tripled the size of the deficit. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/0...

Now let's look at Obama's record on Tax increases. None – couldn't find any. Obama did propose increasing taxes on the rich, but none of his proposals were made into law.

How about tax cuts? Obama tax cuts reached 95% of Americans. http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/10/2...

The reason the mythology is so at odds with the actual facts, is that Reagan played to his conservative base. He did cut spending – on social programs and programs that helped the poor and the middle class. But at the same time he really really increased spending for the military Industrial Complex. He did cut taxes for the super rich but he just transferred the tax burden to the poor and middle class.

So what was the actual tax burden under Reagan compared to Obama. At this time in Reagan's presidency, the top tax rate was 50% for people making over $106,000. The bottom tax rate was 11% for people earning up to $2,100.

Under Obama the top tax rate is 35% for people earning over $379,150. The bottom tax rate is only 10% for those making up to $8,500.

"For a family of four, the "average income tax rate under Reagan in 1983 was 11.06 percent. Under Clinton in 1992, it was 9.18 percent. And under Obama in 2010, it was 4.68 percent."

During Reagan's time, income tax revenue ranged from 7.8 to 9.4 percent of GDP. Last year, it was 6.2 percent and is not projected to climb back to 9 percent until 2016. In fact, in 2009, Americans paid their lowest taxes in 60 years." http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06...

So do we really have a spending problem or is it a revenue problem? Revenue crashed during the economic collapse, yet the super rich today are only paying 16.8% of their income in taxes because most of that income is capital gains taxed at 10%.

At the same time Corporate taxes which used to provide 1/3rd of total revenue, has dropped considerably. Two thirds of corporations pay no taxes at all!! http://www.alternet.org/economy/150387/2...

Republicans want to kill Social Security and Medicare and take that money and give another trillion dollars to the millionaires. Are they doing the will of the people?

81% of the people think that a surtax on millionaires should be enacted to help balance the budget. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41876558/ns/...

I think we should help balance the budget by asking the rich and the corporations to pay their fair share. Obama' so called Radical tax increases would retain the low tax rates on everyone except the rich who's tax rates would go up from 35% to 39.5% the rates they were when Clinton created $200 billion surpluses projected indefinitely into the future.

I think we should go even further. I think we should return to the top tax rates that Reagan had during his first term. I think we should have a surtax on millionaires of 50%.
http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/...
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
11 months ago: Al.

You need some serious sleep man.

11 months ago: No. I have a better idea.

Go out and protest that our country is now fighting 3 separate wars, and that our President is ignoring Congress.


Er......uh...... No, never mind. No war protesting now.

Hypocrit.
11 months ago: Didn't Regan oppose the FED until he was almost killed... then did an about face?

"Any President that Would Dare Oppose The Federal Reserve Gets Assassinated: History Lesson & JP Morgan Buyout of Bear Stearns"
http://www.dailypaul.com/53998/any-presi...

...maybe that is why Regan went on a spending spree... with his new lease on life !]
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
11 months ago: Yeah, I would say skip back in time, and we can just go with JFK's tax policies. And he was opposed to the FED too. Set up a plan to systematically take back our currency, starting with Silver Certificate bills. Oops, they killed him, though.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
11 months ago: I think the fact that Obama is studying Reagan as a role model speaks volumes.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
11 months ago: It is curious how all of the Tea Partiers are supporting giving the millionaires another trillion dollars. How can they support policies that only benefit the richest 5% of the country at the expense of the other 95%?

They are sold a bill of goods that all taxes are universally bad, but wars, the military, interest on our debt, medicare etc. have to be paid, and if the rich don't pay than the middle class end up paying more. Tax revenue remains constant at about 18% of GDP. If the rich get income tax breaks than the middle class end up paying more state, and local taxes and thousands of additional fees, and they end up with less social services like schools, libraries, and swimming pools. So the foolish Tea Partiers are asking to have their taxes increased.

Taxes are necessary for civilization to function, so if someone has to pay them, why not those with all of the wealth who are rolling in dough?

We are told that we have to throw money at the rich and corporations so they will hopefully create a few jobs, but we have done that for 10 years with no jobs created.

If we want to create jobs, target specific tax cuts to people or corporations only if they do hire people.

If we want to stimulate the economy give the tax breaks to the poor and middle class not the rich. The poor spend the money, the rich send it to off shore tax shelters. If we tax the rich we take money that would not be used and recirculate it into the economy and can use it to create jobs.
sunny2
sunny2
11 months ago: Unemployment went up, Al.
9.5 percent.
Those not counted in that percent must have to be another few million.
They better get the taxes from the rich because for sure it won't come from the rest of us. People are at the mercy of this Government.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
11 months ago: The Republicans are at war with the poor and the middle class in the country.

They propose slashing $900 million from three federal nutrition programs. This could deprive up to 500,000 women, infants and children and seniors of the food they need.

To demonstrate where their priorities are, one year of food for those most in need, is equal to only one week of Bush's Tax cuts for the rich. http://www.commondreams.org/further/2011...
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
11 months ago: Red I agree with you that we should all get out in the streets again to protest the wars. Obama promised to eliminate all troops from Iraq by the end of the year and to begin draw down of troops from Afghanistan next month.

He is being pressured by the military and the right wing to continue those wars even though the majority of people in the country are tired of fighting these wars and want them ended.

It costs a million dollars a year to keep each one of our soldiers over there. It would save hundreds of billions of dollars which could be used to create jobs and upgrade our crumbling infrastructure, which would grow the economy which would reduce the deficit much much more than the senseless austerity programs pushed by the right.

While we are at it, why don't we eliminate most of the thousand bases we have on foreign soil, and set up training programs to give the returning troops high paying jobs in renewable energy and clean green jobs.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.