As a reminder, taxes on the upper echelons were much higher from Eisenhower until Reagan. For most of that time, the economy was really pretty good. The stock market (which used to not be used as the main measure of how the country was doing) grew just fine. In fact, much of the action-reaction we have in society can be traced back to the 1980s, which spawned this modern extremism.
Other items from this blog, which refer to outside economists' reports, are below:
5 comments:
This seems a very good idea.
We could try it.... Wish we could get more people to look at policies that help the most people, rather than personalities!
Regarding the other post: there was that remark circulating that if HRC got elected, there'd be a taco truck on every corner. The president is quite proud of his mother being a Scottish immigrant. Haggis is a Scottish dish, and quite nasty, from what I hear. Basically, cold oatmeal in sheep guts!
42- the answer to the question of life. According to one of my favorite novels! I'm following you now 😊
Hey, MeLisa--- I never really responded, but I did notice you were following. Thanks. I got accused recently of being a tax & spend liberal. Even ideas like this are accused of being "socialism", which they're not. Those ideas are not where I want to go at all. The biggest reason I want to change the tax structure is to lessen the boom & crash cycle of the stock market, which takes everything with it. The second thing is to give the younger, starting out members of the middle class an easier time making it---school loans are eating them alive. The third thing is to find ways to help more people have a living wage, or at least to make life easier for the working poor. It "would" be socialism to have a forced wage structure.
Maybe taxes should be even more progressive at the top. Maybe there should be more brackets, starting at 42% marginal taxes for those making $500,000+ and gradually going up to 47% for the very wealthiest billionaires.
Post a Comment