Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

CHART: when taxes go up on rich, unemployment goes down

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:26 PM
Original message
CHART: when taxes go up on rich, unemployment goes down
LARRY BEINHART FOR BUZZFLASH

It's quite simple really: Tax cuts usually lead to higher unemployment. Tax increases usually lead to lower unemployment.

Since 1950 we have had five tax increases on the rich. Four out of five times unemployment went down.

Since 1950 we have ten cuts to the top marginal rate. Six out of ten times unemployment has gone up.

Chart here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
maryf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&Rnt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CaliforniaPeggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. The Republicans are obtuse bastards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
3. So it's just a temporary connection then?
Because those numbers in general look remarkably uncorrelated to me. Besides marginal tax rates don't mean much if there are a lot of exemptions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. tenuous might be better. at the very least, this undercuts the GOP point that tax cuts on the rich
will magically boost our economy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. Yup. And it's strange how they can never explain why
Those same tax rates for the past 10 years haven't created jobs yet. When does the *MAGIC* kick in???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #12
19. it kicks in IMMEDIATELY
for the rich who get the tax cuts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. I meant the "job creating" magic. How many more decades till THAT kicks in???
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. if you're willing to be their Jeff Gannon, there's probably an opening right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. They might need another Glenn Beck pretty soon
As soon as Colonel Murdock tires of having so few sponsors for his show... He does make $33 Million a year (so I could stop giving a sh*t about the poor myself, just like our multi-millionaire President has).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #21
30. They say be patient, it's still trickling down
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. M.C. Escher applied to Repuke economic theory. Genius!
+1000 on this one

It's rofl good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dallasmerlin Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-10 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
37. Taxes up !
When taxes go up the people go down !
national loans
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
veganlush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
5. Thom Hartmann has been making a
similar point for years. When the rates were higher on top earners, the economy was more stable. Since Reagan, the economy has been subject to much more instability.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. I could see less incentive to cannibalize functional businesses for short term profit
and it could be that they do this when the regulatory and tax window is open because they expect us to eventually figure it out and close the window.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
6. The Republicans or the rich do not care about unemployment
They want it all and they want it now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
31. Oh no, they care all right....
Edited on Sun Dec-05-10 06:33 PM by guruoo
because they know high unemployment makes the warm bodies more willing to accept any job,
under any conditions, at any pay. Many employers love to turn the screws during times
of high unemployment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Wielding Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:44 PM
Response to Original message
7. OMG!Free Enterprise Bush Republicans really screwed us!
Edited on Sun Dec-05-10 12:44 PM by The Wielding Truth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yodermon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
8. incentive to leave capital in the company instead of profit-taking
in the form of exorbitant salaries & bonuses.
"leave capital in the company" == hiring.

"tax breaks for hiring" == the carrot.
"tax increases if you take out profits for yachts" == the stick.
It's been all carrot, no stick for 30 years.
Plus gotta close the loopholes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. leave capital in the company
May I add "capital investments, expansion, innovation, research and development, new products, etc."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Modern day robber barrons would say you must be a Communist. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. To quote a great American
Edited on Sun Dec-05-10 03:00 PM by txlibdem
To quote a great American, FDR, "Never before in all our history have these forces been so united against one candidate as they stand today. They are unanimous in their hate for meand I welcome their hatred."

Another nice FDR quote from the same speech, "We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob."

http://www.dailykos.com/tv/w/000499 /


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. One more...
Edited on Sun Dec-05-10 03:39 PM by guruoo
"Since a hundred million dollars in New York and twenty-two fish-hooks on the border of the Arctic Circle
represent the same financial supremacy, a man in straitened circumstances is a fool to stay in New York
when he can buy ten cents' worth of fish-hooks and emigrate."
-Mark Twain, "The Esquimaux Maiden's Romance"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. Are you saying "America, love it or leave it?"
Or am I totally misreading the meaning and purpose for your quote?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. No....
Edited on Sun Dec-05-10 05:45 PM by guruoo
Funny though, I had a spontaneous worry about that while I was away,
going through checkout at the store.

Now that you mention it though, I wouldn't mind if the robbber barron types
that are outsourcing so many jobs, and moving operations overseas just
went ahead and 'outsourced' themselves in the process!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txlibdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #28
34. Now THAT would be an idea. Deport the thieves and con men!
Strip them of their ill gotten gains first, however!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yodermon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #15
29. yep! all the stuff that builds their business, stimulates the economy, and creates jobs
within and without the company.
Taxes should be a lever to affect the economy just like interest rates.

Instead, we have "taxes are evil and must be cut in good economies, bad economies, war time, peace time, and miller time" :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kablooie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
9. And you probably think Global warming is real too. Don't confuse the issue with facts!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
10. Oddly enough, higher taxes may be encouraging big business to make up the differance,
Edited on Sun Dec-05-10 12:55 PM by guruoo
through expansion. And of course, for a business to expand, it must first recruit more warm bodies to man the machines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. I tend to buy the argument that demand drives expansion and not much else
if you aren't moving product, there isn't much point in expanding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. 'When times are good shoot for volume, when times are bad, go for market share'
-An old business axiom I first heard of 30 years ago from an SBA business school instructor named Les Beavers.

Actually, when I posted that first one I was thinking more on the lines of how desperate fat cats can get
when it comes to maintaining their current lifestyle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #16
23. is it lifestyle or perception of not keeping up with their prep school homies?
If you had tens of millions in the bank and were netting a million a year, it's hard to see how you're lifestyle could be affected. Maybe you would have to rent a house instead of buy one in Vail to go skiing once a year, but even that wouldn't be a problem for people netting a little more than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #23
32. It must be a matter more of perception than reality, on their part
After the first few mil wealthy people I've known more or less seem to begin playing it as a game that is independent of
their real needs. At that point, their perception of self worth seems to become completely dependant upon the rise and fall of what
amounts to be no more than some abstract numbers on a page.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-10 03:20 AM
Response to Reply #32
36. I read a psychologist's take on this once: whatever we have, we want at least 20% more
which is a very useful impulse when you are a hunter/gatherer caveman, but not so much once you've accumulated enough so that no one in your family has to work for the next ten generations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fearless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
14. I don't think correlation equates to causation...
Edited on Sun Dec-05-10 01:23 PM by Fearless
There are a lot of things at play that determine unemployment, most assuredly economic confidence to start. I think saying that tax cuts cause unemployment or that tax hikes cause jobs to be created is ignoring the fact that the economy is not that simple

It would be NICE to have this as a political talking point, but I don't think you can find an economist who would say that it is a 100% causal comparison. A simpler explanation of this phenomenon is that taxes are only successfully raised during better economic times or that tax cuts are made because of bad economies. Either COULD be true, but of course just saying it doesn't make it so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #14
25. I wonder if the repugs worry about the accuracy of their talking points?
Or whether their policies actually achieve their stated goals...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fearless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-05-10 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. While that may or may not be true at large
We need to keep our own talking points accurate as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-10 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #14
35. the point is it at least there isn't causation in the way the GOP claims
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shawn703 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-06-10 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
38. But it takes years for the tax cuts to affect the economy
This is what I'm told when I've brought this up to the righties I know.

Reducing the tax rate from 91 to 77 in 1963 led to a 3.5% unemployment rate in 1969. Bumping them up in 1968-1969 led to 9.7% unemployment in 1982. The Reagan tax cuts between 1981-1988 led to the 4.0% unemployment in 2000, and the Clinton tax hikes led to the 9.8% unemployment we have now. Unemployment will fall anytime now because the Bush tax cuts will finally start to have an effect.

As long as people keep falling for it, the Republicans will keep selling it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 24th 2014, 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC