Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Economists Say We Should Tax The Rich At 90 Percent [View all]JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)130. You are so right.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
130 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Oh but there most certainly was competition -- mostly "made in Japan" was a saying
loudsue
Oct 2014
#100
A few hundred thousand men KIA in a World War had no impact on unemployment?
cherokeeprogressive
Oct 2014
#69
The biggest correlation has been the huge increase in speculation since the early 1980s
happyslug
Oct 2014
#94
Low tax rates on top earners have meant lots of recessions, lots of economic upheaval.
JDPriestly
Oct 2014
#19
The wealthy love recessions because they can buy a good company for little or nothing and ride out
Jim Beard
Oct 2014
#95
Good point. Trade is a smaller part of our economy (24%) than any other country other than Sudan.
pampango
Oct 2014
#105
You dont think that was a big part of it? We made EVERYTHING. Others made very little.
7962
Oct 2014
#53
I notice both your cite and my cite rely on the same Government data, and the difference is SS
happyslug
Oct 2014
#92
Europe was back on its feet by 1947, and Germany was already the #1 Exporter by the 1960s.
happyslug
Oct 2014
#63
The growth came about because of full employment (which there wasn't, between 1929 and 1942 or so)
Spider Jerusalem
Oct 2014
#50
Couldn't you say industry failed to run amok with planned obsolescence back then?
RedCloud
Oct 2014
#52
Yes, but the rates that were ACTUALLY paid by the wealthy and big business were higher then than now
stillwaiting
Oct 2014
#108
What's the objective source for the allegation that high tax rates led to general prosperity?
Spider Jerusalem
Oct 2014
#45
I've been saying that for a long time. I'm glad economists finally agree with me. eom
Blanks
Oct 2014
#11
Good riddance. We don't need people buying prime real estate in the US and then not paying
JDPriestly
Oct 2014
#28
When you tax at 100%, what incentive is there for them to do anything?
Shoulders of Giants
Oct 2014
#85
Eliminate all deductions and loopholes and increase the rate to 55% for the top 1 %.
roamer65
Oct 2014
#77
Alas, the people (congress) who could do this have been bought by uber-rich.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Oct 2014
#65
If a top marginal rate of 90% would increase everyone's well-being, it could be argued that these
indepat
Oct 2014
#70
Reagan's intention seemed to be to turn America into a feudalistic nation
AZ Progressive
Oct 2014
#82
I think this is the single most effective way to strengthen the middle class.
lovemydog
Oct 2014
#74
I am for 50 K, and threy is support that that would INCREASE revenue to the Government.
happyslug
Oct 2014
#84
Sadly, Democrats asked the wealthy only to pay a little more, as if a little more would have cured
indepat
Oct 2014
#96
And I'd like a Federal Department of crisp, lossless, Grateful Dead soundboards.
Warren DeMontague
Oct 2014
#103
Yup. Not much to add to that other than saying: Share that graph far and wide.
True Blue Door
Oct 2014
#107
I would be happy with FDR's 60%-80% top rate from 1933 till WWII started. n/t
pampango
Oct 2014
#109
$100 million income taxed at 90%: can they survive on just $1 million per year?
Martin Eden
Oct 2014
#116
Democratic Party isn't strong enough to advocate for working families. Social justice
whereisjustice
Oct 2014
#118
I'll agree if the $$ goes towards Social programs and not to more military empire building.
Amimnoch
Oct 2014
#121