Buy WILLisms XML Feed Mar. 21, 2005 11:50 AM June 20, 2005 5:36 AM Oct. 31, 2005 12:41 AM Nov. 23, 2005 3:28 PM Nov. 30, 2005 1:33 PM May 12, 2006 6:15 PM Oct. 17, 2006 12:30 AM Dec. 13, 2006 1:01 PM Dec. 18, 2006 6:37 PM Dec. 21, 2006 12:31 PM Dec. 22, 2006 10:22 PM July 25, 2007 4:32 PM May 28, 2008 11:12 PM June 9, 2008 12:25 PM Blogroll Me! July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 March 13, 2008 Due: July 29, 2008 Mar. 14, 2006 Apr. 4, 2008 May 19, 2007 July 9, 2006 July 14, 2006 Powered by Movable Type 3.17 Site Design by Sekimori WILLisms.com June 2008 Book of the Month (certified classy): The WILLisms.com Gift Shop:
This Week's Carnival of Revolutions:
Carnival Home Base:
|
« Quotational Therapy: Part 58 -- Reagan's "Tear Down This Wall" Speech. | WILLisms.com | Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 217 -- Teen Birth Rate. » Trivia Tidbit Of The Day: Part 216 -- Tax Cuts For The...Reagan Tax Cuts, Bush Tax Cuts: Some Surprising (For Some) Data- The Joint Economic Committee of Congress notes that the wealthy pay the overwhelming majority of taxes in America (.pdf): ![]() It'll be another year or two before the effects of President Bush's tax relief can be fully calculated and analyzed, but thus far, it appears as if the rich might actually pay a larger share now than before tax cuts. But let's look at the Reagan years. How did Ronald Reagan's tax cuts impact these proportions? Here are the facts about tax relief in the 1980s, from The Heritage Foundation (.pdf): ![]() Although the highest marginal tax rates fell substantially, the wealthy actually paid a higher proportion of America's taxes by the end of the 1980s. Counter-intuitive, right? It really shouldn't be anymore. In the vaguest sense, lower taxes produce faster economic growth. Faster economic growth then produces more tax revenues. When the highest tax rates came down in the 80s, it provided greater incentives to conduct business and engage in commerce. But it wasn't just the 1980s. Try on the 1920s for size (.pdf): ![]() Or Kennedy's "tax cuts for the rich" in the 1960s (.pdf): ![]() Lower taxes = higher tax revenues. This increase may not happen immediately, but it has happened within a short time frame, again and again, over the past several decades. It's not crazy talk, voodoo economics, or even right-wing delusion to claim that tax cuts pay for themselves. Why is this information almost never reported on CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, or the major newspapers around the country? Why do most Democrats and some Republicans fail to acknowledge these facts? Why are we repeatedly subjected to erroneous canards about "tax cuts for the rich" whenever a Republican fights for tax relief (typically for everyone)?
Previous Trivia Tidbit: Vince Young For Heisman. Posted by Will Franklin · 14 November 2005 06:10 PM Comments |