1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. TALK.POLITICS.GUNS

  • The myths, plural, of the 70% marginal tax rate

    From Rudy Canoza@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jun 29 17:43:48 2025
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.society.liberalism, alt.atheism
    XPost: alt.fun, alt.politics.democrats.d

    First, it was Democrats, not Republiscums/QAnon, who killed it. Read the facts here: https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2019/02/05/democrats-70-percent-tax-rate-000879/

    Second, virtually no one paid it, and the same was true of the even earlier 90% rate. From that site:

    It was in this battle of the bills that the Democrats proposed to cut the top
    tax rate to 50 percent. They thought this would help attract votes from
    conservatives in both parties in the House. And importantly, they decided
    that in terms of revenue, the superhigh top tax bracket that draws so much
    political attention just didn’t mean very much: Of the $517 billion the
    Treasury collected in 1980, only $3 billion to $5 billion came from the 70
    percent bracket — less than *one percent* of total tax revenue.
    [emphasis added]

    With the political cover that Democrats had proposed lowering the 70 percent
    top rate first, the Reagan administration was only too happy to adopt the
    proposal as part of their plan—and it was the Republican plan that ultimately
    won.

    The Democrats of today should consider what the Democrats of 1980 knew: The
    top marginal tax rate generates very little income for the federal
    government. At the time, the 70 percent rate didn’t kick in until $212,000,
    which in today’s dollars is over $600,000. Since this was a marginal rate, no
    one, not even the richest millionaire, paid 70 percent of their entire income
    in taxes; only the portion of their income above the threshold was taxed at
    the top rate. Most important, the rich had ways to shift their income to
    avoid taxes, because the top rate only applied to “unearned income” such as
    dividends. This meant that whether the goal was to reduce inequality or raise
    revenue, the top tax rate was not very effective.

    And that was *always* true. Due to "loopholes," virtually *no one* paid the extortionately high marginal rates.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Henderson@21:1/5 to Rudy Canoza on Mon Jun 30 01:00:22 2025
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.society.liberalism, alt.atheism
    XPost: alt.fun, alt.politics.democrats.d

    Rudy Canoza wrote:

    First, it was Democrats, not Republiscums/QAnon, who killed it. Read
    the facts here:

    https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2019/02/05/democrats-70-percent-tax-rate-000879/

    Second, virtually no one paid it, and the same was true of the even
    earlier 90% rate. From that site:

    It was in this battle of the bills that the Democrats proposed to
    cut the top tax rate to 50 percent. They thought this would help
    attract votes from conservatives in both parties in the House. And importantly, they decided that in terms of revenue, the superhigh
    top tax bracket that draws so much political attention just didn’t
    mean very much: Of the $517 billion the Treasury collected in
    1980, only $3 billion to $5 billion came from the 70 percent
    bracket — less than *one percent* of total tax revenue. [emphasis added]

    With the political cover that Democrats had proposed lowering the
    70 percent top rate first, the Reagan administration was only too
    happy to adopt the proposal as part of their plan—and it was the Republican plan that ultimately won.

    The Democrats of today should consider what the Democrats of 1980
    knew: The top marginal tax rate generates very little income for
    the federal government. At the time, the 70 percent rate didn’t
    kick in until $212,000, which in today’s dollars is over $600,000.
    Since this was a marginal rate, no one, not even the richest
    millionaire, paid 70 percent of their entire income in taxes; only
    the portion of their income above the threshold was taxed at the
    top rate. Most important, the rich had ways to shift their income to
    avoid taxes, because the top rate only applied to “unearned income”
    such as dividends. This meant that whether the goal was to reduce inequality or raise revenue, the top tax rate was not very
    effective.

    And that was always true. Due to "loopholes," virtually *no one* paid
    the extortionately high marginal rates.


    Exactly!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rudy Canoza@21:1/5 to All on Thu Jul 3 08:39:24 2025
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.society.liberalism, alt.atheism
    XPost: alt.fun, alt.politics.democrats.d

    First, it was Democrats, not Republiscums/QAnon, who killed it. Read the facts here: https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2019/02/05/democrats-70-percent-tax-rate-000879/

    Second, virtually no one paid it, and the same was true of the even earlier 90% rate. From that site:

    It was in this battle of the bills that the Democrats proposed to cut the top
    tax rate to 50 percent. They thought this would help attract votes from
    conservatives in both parties in the House. And importantly, they decided
    that in terms of revenue, the superhigh top tax bracket that draws so much
    political attention just didn’t mean very much: Of the $517 billion the
    Treasury collected in 1980, only $3 billion to $5 billion came from the 70
    percent bracket — less than *one percent* of total tax revenue.
    [emphasis added]

    With the political cover that Democrats had proposed lowering the 70 percent
    top rate first, the Reagan administration was only too happy to adopt the
    proposal as part of their plan — and it was the Republican plan that
    ultimately won.

    The Democrats of today should consider what the Democrats of 1980 knew: The
    top marginal tax rate generates very little income for the federal
    government. At the time, the 70 percent rate didn’t kick in until $212,000,
    which in today’s dollars is over $600,000. Since this was a marginal rate, no
    one, not even the richest millionaire, paid 70 percent of their entire income
    in taxes; only the portion of their income above the threshold was taxed at
    the top rate. Most important, the rich had ways to shift their income to
    avoid taxes, because the top rate only applied to “unearned income” such as
    dividends. This meant that whether the goal was to reduce inequality or raise
    revenue, the top tax rate was not very effective.

    And that was *always* true. Due to "loopholes," virtually *no one* paid the extortionately high marginal rates. AOC and Bernie blabbering about 70%-90% is just sophomoric political theater. It's not going to happen.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)