Republicans can rejoice !
They switched the tax burden even MORE to the countries middle class while the country spends almost a Trillion dollars MORE then it takes in…
Is this anyway to run a a country?
In 1980, by contrast, the 400 richest had an effective tax rate of 47 percent. In 1960, their tax rate was as high as 56 percent. The effective tax rate paid by the bottom 50 percent, by contrast, has changed little over time.
The analysis differs from many other published estimates of tax burdens by encompassing the totality of taxes Americans pay: not just federal income taxes but also corporate taxes, as well as taxes paid at the state and local levels. It also includes the burden of about $250 billion of what Saez and Zucman call “indirect taxes,” such as licenses for motor vehicles and businesses.
The analysis, which was the subject of a column in the New York Times on Monday, is also notable for the detailed breakdown of the tax burden of not just the top 1 percent but also the top 0.1 percent, the top 0.01 percent and the 400 richest households….
Note…
Republicans have been itching to pass ANOTHER tax CUT for their rich patrons….
James, Why post this story which suggests that you are actually opposed to moving the tax burden to the middle class? Previously you have used right wing talking points and complained that Warren wants to “soak the rich”. You have said many times that “Sanders is no Democrat”. But unlike you, Sanders doesn’t repeatedly use right wing talking points. You can continue to call yourself a Democrat – just as the Conservative from Texas called himself a Democrat – but most Democrats think that the wealthy should pay much higher taxes than the middle class. Thst fact is not going to change – especially as the wealth and income distributions increasingly get concentrated into fewer hands.
While Obama was a great president, he failed to reverse these trends- and there is nothing Biden proposed that will reverse them either. With regard to wealth and income distributions, Warren and Sanders are addressing serious problems that need to be addressed.
Zreebs,James wants to tax the rich too, just not “too much” haha!
Z?
I am NOT afraid to take from ALL sides….
I AM a REGISTERD Democrat….
I donate to the DNC and get tons of mail from them and the state party…
Fine…
I have said this before and I will repeat it….
Trump and the Republicans cost me, a middle class tax payer almost a thousand dollars MORE this year….
If Sanders or Warren want to raise my taxes MORE?
SCREW THEM!….
If YOU want to pay MORE taxes for them?
You stand up and vote for them…
Do I support higher taxes for the rich?
DAMN REAL!!!!
Is the tax rate going back up to 56% for millionaire’s and Billionaires?
Doubtful…Unless Democrats get the House, Senate and Presidency by a GOOD sized margin…
I agree with you that Obama was unable to do what Sanders and Warren are selling but won’t be able to deliver…
No problem with them addressing the issue…
I agree with them…
But it’s just progressive food talk…
James, There are very few Democrats who complain that people in our party want to “soak the rich” – as you complained yesterday. If you are genuinely concerned about the wealthy paying a smaller percentage of their taxes than the middle class, then don’t criticize when people advocate changing that.
I would agree with you that there is a theoretical point where increasing taxes on the wealthy causes more problems than it solves. But we aren’t even remotely close to that point.
In closing, it is worth pointing out that countries that have extremely unequal income and wealth distributions have lower economic growth than countries that have more equitable income and wealth distributions. So a fairer economic system also is good for the economy. You should be making that argument instead of complaining about some of the Democratic candidates soaking the rich. If a hedge fund operator has to make do with $10m per year instead of $100m, it won’t have any harmful effects on the economy.
Well?
Our country had good economic growth
Then Trump showed up….
Fair economic system?
THAT seems to be un-American?
Frankly, I find the “concern” over how much taxes the wealthy pay bizarre.
I mean really are we supposed to feel “bad” that some poor multi millionaire might have to pay an extra million in taxes with an income of 50 million or so?
What kind of madeness is this?
Once again, I don’t give aDamn(With emphasis on that word,”damn”) how much taxes the wealthy pay. As Mitt Romney said,they will be fine.
There are a lot Of things in this world to worry about.
How much taxes the wealthy pay isn’t on my list.
I DO care about how much I PAY….
What does that statement have to do with this discussion?
Didn’t Mitt Romney pat a lower tax rate than your average PetsMart cashier?
Them again maybe Mitt deserves a lower rate than said cashier since putting his dog in a crate on top of his car was more humane than putting him inside the car with the family according to our “non tribalist” .
What’s funny is I wasn’t arguing that Mitt be brought up on animal cruelty charges or anything. Just noting that people’s recollections change over time. But nope. When it comes to St. Mitt if he remembered it as being the best thing for the dog 40 yrs ago daggumit it was!
But the rest of us are tribalist. Not him.
I liked the Topic, and the conversation, when ever you talk about taxes you talk about personal shit because taxing takes money out of our pockets, which sucks.
I know James, he definitely has always been even keeled in regards to taxes, I think he is being more pragmatic and saying the extreme of Warren and Sanders isn’t going to be a reality, especially when you consider the political gridlock with the executive and legislative branches. I hope the tax breaks the Republicans gave get rolled back some, especially seeing as the lovely idea of Trickle Down Economics (a.ka. Voodoo Economics) has not decreased the deficit, and surprise surprise, we took in less money in tax revenues this year and we are more in debt now. I am for pragmatic taxes: Tax income for social security on all wages not have the cap at 150K i think, they could reduce the percentage above 150K, but at least tax all income that way SS stays solvent. Tax capital gains higher since that’s how the Uber rich get that disparity of tax rate lower than a working class stiff. But we don’t need to immediately go back to 1950s tax rates, slowly walk back the line that the Republicans drew.
Thank You bdog…
Actually I am less interested in tax “rates” ,where most of the debate is ,than in in the many and varied “deductions “ that accrue to the wealthy.
That’s where a good deal of the money goes.Indeed, in my view, the Republicans often use the debate over “rates” as a mechanism to divert discussion over the use of “deductions” by the wealthy.