• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Study:Tax Cuts Don't Lead to Growth

A

Anonymous

Guest
Study: Tax Cuts Don't Lead to Growth


A new study looking at 65 years of data shows no correlation between tax cuts and job growth. A graph in the story makes it clear that the George H.W. Bush and Clinton tax increases did not hurt the economy and the George W. Bush tax cuts did not help it. Also noted is that economic growth was high during the Eisenhower administration, when the top marginal tax rate was 91%.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/analysis-tax-cuts-don-t-lead-to-economic-growth-a-new-65-year-study-finds-20120917

Maybe as we try to figure out how to cut the deficit and pay off all our debt that came about because of GW cutting taxes while fighting 2 wars-- maybe we should look at increasing those taxes and revenue while also cutting spending... Do the honorable thing and pay off our debt during our generation....
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
At a top rate of 70 percent in 1980, the top 1 percent paid $47 billion in federal taxes. Today, at a 35 percent rate, they paid more than $400 billion. Even adjusting for inflation, that is a nearly 300 percent increase in tax payments by the rich.
After the Reagan income-tax cuts in 1981, the highest-earning 1 percent more than doubled their collective income-tax payments, from $50 billion in 1981 to $114 billion in 1988.
After the 1986 tax reform act, income-tax payments by the rich rose from $70 billion to $146 billion in 1993.
After the 2003 tax cuts, payments by the rich increased from $256 billion in 2003 to $451 billion in 2007. Some of those revenue gains were inflated by the housing bubble, but there was certainly no revenue loss.
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ir_22.htm
 

Mike

Well-known member
Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 17, 1963, annual budget message to the Congress, fiscal year 1964


“In today’s economy, fiscal prudence and responsibility call for tax reduction even if it temporarily enlarges the federal deficit – why reducing taxes is the best way open to us to increase revenues.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 21, 1963, annual message to the Congress: “The Economic Report Of The President”
 

TSR

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
At a top rate of 70 percent in 1980, the top 1 percent paid $47 billion in federal taxes. Today, at a 35 percent rate, they paid more than $400 billion. Even adjusting for inflation, that is a nearly 300 percent increase in tax payments by the rich.
After the Reagan income-tax cuts in 1981, the highest-earning 1 percent more than doubled their collective income-tax payments, from $50 billion in 1981 to $114 billion in 1988.
After the 1986 tax reform act, income-tax payments by the rich rose from $70 billion to $146 billion in 1993.
After the 2003 tax cuts, payments by the rich increased from $256 billion in 2003 to $451 billion in 2007. Some of those revenue gains were inflated by the housing bubble, but there was certainly no revenue loss.
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ir_22.htm

So is the author saying that if we were still under the tax rates of say, 1980 we wouldn't have any more in tax revenues today???? I also have to think about the stagnant wages of the middle class and the top 2% whose incomes have increased nearly 300% last I read.
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Who said unemployment creates jobs? Who said every dollar of unemployment adds $1.73 economic growth? Who said that? It was Nancy Pelosi. Who said welfare creates jobs?? Same woman..... a many times over millionaire.
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Study: Tax Cuts Don't Lead to Growth


A new study looking at 65 years of data shows no correlation between tax cuts and job growth. A graph in the story makes it clear that the George H.W. Bush and Clinton tax increases did not hurt the economy and the George W. Bush tax cuts did not help it. Also noted is that economic growth was high during the Eisenhower administration, when the top marginal tax rate was 91%.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/analysis-tax-cuts-don-t-lead-to-economic-growth-a-new-65-year-study-finds-20120917

Maybe as we try to figure out how to cut the deficit and pay off all our debt that came about because of GW cutting taxes while fighting 2 wars-- maybe we should look at increasing those taxes and revenue while also cutting spending... Do the honorable thing and pay off our debt during our generation....

Pretty plain to see Old Lapdog never owned a business and had employees or had to meet a payroll........or wanted to hire more employees or increase the size of his business....... :roll:
 
Top