Guess what conservatives?
Lower top tax rates have absolutely nothing to do with job creation, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics! Oh what a surprise!
In the 50 years from 1932 to 1981, the top tax rate averaged almost 80 percent and job growth averaged 2.61 percent and GDP growth averaged a very positive 8.59 percent.
In the 30 years from 1981 (the onset of Reagan’s “trickle- down economic folly”) to 2012, the top tax rate has averaged well below 40 percent and job growth averaged a pathetic .94 percent and GDP growth averaged just 3.6 percent.
In other words, high tax years saw job growth rates 2.77 times higher and GDP growth rates 2.39 times higher than low tax years!
So what exactly can we gather from these “official” Bureau of Labor Statistics?
My interpretation is this ... we must stop listening to the deceivers on the far right who keep trying to convince us that we are doing severe damage to America if we raise taxes on these so-called “Job Creators.”
Or better yet, why don’t we write our Republican Congressmen and ask them to “STOP LYING TO US!”
We are not going to see exceptional job growth or GDP growth until the “real job creators” are given the respect we all deserve.
That’s right, we the middle class, are the true job creators!
When hard work is valued, our shrinking incomes and our pensions and health care benefits are all returned the way they were prior to 1981, America will again grow and prosper!
Now start spreading the truth please!
Rod Livdahl
Mesa
Accuracy posted at 10:17 am on Sat, Jul 21, 2012.
Rod Livdahl: “Lower top tax rates have absolutely nothing to do with job creation, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics!”
Not in those words — according to the “U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics”.
So who really did said that?? — — “By the way, these tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans are also the tax cuts that are least likely to promote growth. So we can't afford to keep that up. Not right now,” said President Obama.
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; In June, the national unemployment rate remained high at 8.2 percent. The Rockford metropolitan area’s unemployment rate in May — 10.4 percent — was the highest in the state.
A new poll reveals a majority of Americans believe Obama has changed the economy for the worse . . . Yet, President Obama does not explain how higher taxes will create jobs?
Arizona Willie posted at 11:00 am on Sat, Jul 21, 2012.
When the ultra-rich paid a much higher percentage they had more incentive to start new businesses and hire more people.
Although they paid a high tax rate they still had a lot of money and in order to get more money they had to create more jobs to bring more in.
Since Reagan we have been allowing the ultra-rich to keep most of their money and they no longer have any great incentive to create more companies and more jobs.
Just as the Republicans claim poor people won't work because they are getting so much money from welfare they don't have to work -- reducing the tax rate on the ultra-wealthy was a dis-incentive for them to go to work and create more jobs because they don't need to.
They have plenty of money for their new yacht / mansion etc.
The rich are sitting on their money like they accuse the poor of sitting on their Azz because they have no incentive to use their money creating more businesses and hiring more people. Instead of paying 2/3 of their income they are keeping 2/3 of their income.
Do the math people.
Welfare for the rich has the same affect as they claim welfare has for the poor.
chuckles3 posted at 11:50 am on Sat, Jul 21, 2012.
sigh, no one is talking about lowering tax rates. We are just trying to keep them at the current level.
Arguing one cause/effect relationship here is intellectually moronic.
I could easily cite the growth in entitlements during this time and argue for cutting them back to pre-1981 levels. More people would be motivated to go back to work and contribute to the GDP...see how this works?
chatmandu002 posted at 12:00 pm on Sat, Jul 21, 2012.
Here's hoping that I don't get censored for commenting on this letter like I have be censored on other letters.
Rod,
Play your numbers game. Please follow your changeless, hopeless, transparentless and leaderless president "FORWARD" over the cliff. Just don't pull me with you.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 12:03 pm on Sat, Jul 21, 2012.
THE ONLY THING THAT THE LETTER WRITER GOT RIGHT (AND EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT THE RIGHT IS ALWAYS "RIGHT"....LOL)........IS THAT...........SOMEONE IS .........LYING TO US.
NOW JUST WHOM COULD THAT...."SOMEONE"....BE ?????
[wink][wink][wink]
Cerulean posted at 12:37 pm on Sat, Jul 21, 2012.
Not only is your observation true Rod; also the median earnings for full time male workers has remained flat since 1973, household debt has gone through the roof and the middle-class is shrinking.
If you ask me ;) that is madness, unadulterated folly.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/18/thirty-troubling-years/
Arizona Willie, is right on point as well. [thumbup]
k33j88 posted at 7:37 am on Sun, Jul 22, 2012.
When, as you state: "hard work is valued"---etc, does it always come to mind for me that those who offered meaningful, livable wages were those whom you now attack with your liberal rhetoric. Never, did I ever get a chance to raise my standard of living from a middle-class entrepreneur. Get a life and move to China or Venezuala.
k33j88 posted at 7:49 am on Sun, Jul 22, 2012.
Correction: Hugo Chavez's socialist Venezuela. Az Willie-----The American Dream for all Americans is to reward an honest, hard-work ethic with the ability to keep your earnings to do as one wishes. To not allow one to keep 2/3rds of ones earnings, but to subject it to the collective bureaucracy of taxation is absolutely ludicrous. You and your socialist friends despise capitalism and honest, hard-work ethic, instead opting for destruction of personal property rights and replacing it with communist, collectivist dogma.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 9:19 am on Sun, Jul 22, 2012.
ARE $5 MILLION DOLLAR HOUSES TAXED AT A HIGHER RATE THAN A $90,000.00 HOUSE ?
ARE $250,000 ROLLS-ROYCES TAXED AT A HIGHER RATE THAT A $5000.00 CLUNKER ?
ARE FOOD BILLS FROM AJ's TAXED AT A HIGHER RATE THAN FOOD BILLS AT FOOD CITY MARKETS ?
IS A $1,000.000.00 D-COLOR, INTERNALLY FLAWLESS 5 CARAT DIAMOND RING TAXED HIGHER THAN A 1/20TH OF A CARAT, $180.00, DIAMOND RING FROM COSTCO ?
IF AN ASU PHD GRADUATE STUDENT EARNS AN "A" ON HIS THESIS....IS HIS GRADE CUT IN HALF SO THAT THE STUDENT AT AN ALTERNATIVE HIGH SCHOOL WHO HAS BEEN TRUANT FOR MOST OF THE SEMESTER CAN HAVE HIS/HER "F" UPGRADED TO A "C" ?
ARE THE "CADILLAC" PENSIONS AND THE "CAVIAR" RETIREMENT HEALTH CARE BENEFITS OF OUR PUBLIC SECTOR RETIREES CUT IN HALF SO THAT A HOMELESS RETIRED VIETNAM VETERAN CAN HAVE A PENSION AND HEALTH BENEFITS ?
THE ANSWER IS NO..........THEN WHY SHOULD AMERICAN CITIZENS WHO JUST HAPPEN TO EARN MORE THAN THE AVERAGE WORKER BY THE LUCK OF THE DRAW IN LIFE OR 16HOUR WORK DAYS BE PENALIZED BY HAVING HIS/HER INCOME TAXED AT 100% - 200%- 300%-400% OR 500% HIGHER THAN WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE PAYS. NOTHING ELSE IN AMERICAN LIFE IS TAXED HIGHER FOR ONE CITIZEN THAN IT IS FOR ANOTHER CITIZEN.
INCOME TAXES LIKE EVERY OTHER TAX SHOULD BE THE SAME FOR EVERY AMERICAN.............ANYTHING OTHER THAN A FLAT TAX RATE FOR EVERYONE IS.........WEALTH RE-DISTRIBUTION....(AKA = COMMUNISM).
Arizona Willie posted at 10:57 am on Sun, Jul 22, 2012.
When talking about tax rates for the wealthy --- don't forget that the high tax rates only kick in on very high income.
The first $250,000 or so is taxed the same for the rich as it is for you. They pay the same rate on the first million or so.
I'm not sure of the exact point where the high rate kicks in. It is a progressive rate though. So not all of income above say $1,000,000 is taxed at the highest rate.
The more they make over a certain amount the tax rate gets higher and higher as they go.
So they DO NOT pay the highest rate on their entire income. Only when they get very very rich do those high rates kick in.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 12:01 pm on Sun, Jul 22, 2012.
little willie............IT'S STILL ........WEALTH RE-DISTRIBUTION...WHICH IS ...MARXISM (AKA.....COMMUNISM OR SOCIALISM OR PROGRESSIVE/LIBERAL/DEMOCRAT POLITICS = THEY'R ALL COME FROM THE SAME......"LITTLE RED BOOK" OF CHAIRMAN MAO).
sockratties posted at 3:29 pm on Sun, Jul 22, 2012.
california leon – cars that use excessive amounts of fuel ARE taxed with an additional “gas guzzler” tax. Ferraris and Lambos are a couple of brands that tend to get hit with this tax. Meals taken at restaurants are taxed while food from the market is not. Many college courses are graded on a “curve” which tends to lump the majority of students near the mean and lower the bar for the greater achiever. The Affordable Health Care Act will introduce a “Cadillac” tax on insurance plans that have no deductibles or co-pays or procedure limits. So the answer is… SOMETIMES, although you tried to pick and choose.
What we should be talking about is if there should be incremental taxes on those who have discretionary funds. People who only just get by with their income going entirely to food, rent, health and transportation have to give up necessities when they have to pay taxes. What’s left of the middle class has to give up some quality of life but can meet their minimum obligations with a reasonable tax rate. The wealthy only have to give up excessive spending with a higher tax rate. A flat tax, although it collects very little from the poor overall, punishes them. If a flat tax is introduced it would need to have a cut in point at or above the poverty level.
chatmandu002 posted at 10:33 pm on Sun, Jul 22, 2012.
For a country that demands everyone be treated equally, when it comes to income taxes the government treats us more like communism. From each according to their ability to each according to their need, with the big government determining who has the ability and who has the need.
Arizona Willie posted at 7:22 am on Mon, Jul 23, 2012.
chatmandu ... sounds good to me. Pretty fair system. Yes government determines those factors --- who else could or should? Some entity has to make the determination.
update on tax brackets ... I googled it this morning:
MARRIED FILING JOINTLY
2012 FEDERAL TAX BRACKETS
• Taxable Income:
Income Tax:
• $0 - $17,040
10% of the amount over $0
• $17,041 - $70,700
$1,740 plus 15% of the amount over $17,040
• $70,701 - $142,700
$9,735 plus 25% of the amount over $70,700
• $ 142,701 - $217,450
$27,735 plus 28% of the amount over $142,700
• $ 217,451 - $388,350
$48,665 plus 33% of the amount over $388,350
• $388,350 +
$105,062 plus 35% of the amount over $388,350
So the highest tax bracket ( currently ) does not kick in until they have made over $388,350.
And, don't forget, this is on adjusted gross income after all deductions. Which means their actual gross income would typically be much higher than the $388,350 figure.
And, virtually all your wealthy people are incorporated, so they only pay personal income tax on what they pay themselves.
The rest they shield in the corporation.
Cry me a river for the wealthy.
Dale Whiting posted at 8:30 am on Mon, Jul 23, 2012.
Rod,
Shame on you, attacking Ronald Reagan's trickle down economics in this modern age. I first attacked it in economic class when seated at the foot of Murray Wiedenbaum, the author of that theory. He advised Ronney during his campaign and became the first chairman of Reagan's council of economic advisors. The theory was questionable then and subsequent events including changes in world economics have called into question even more facits of the underlying theory. But never you mind. Mitt believes in espousing that theory disguised by other names. After all, trickling down does involve the 1%. Jobs will be created, but in China, India and alike.
Arizona Willie posted at 10:54 am on Mon, Jul 23, 2012.
Headlines this morning report that poverty in the U.S. is back to 1960 levels before the War on Poverty and Medicare and other programs to raise the standard of living were enacted.
Bank are sitting on record amounts of cash.
Corporations are reporting record profits and also sitting on trillions of dollars in cash .. and they aren't hiring.
The wealthy possess 90% of the wealth in the country.
But conservatives will tell you there is no correlation between these facts.
Riiiggghhhhtttt.
In fact, one of the conservative talking heads reacted to the news by proclaiming that welfare should be stopped because the poor have too much money.
Conservatives are determined to turn America into a 3rd world country and they have almost got it done.
The top 1% already owns 90% of the wealth and the rest of us are like baby birds waiting to be fed.
This rise in poverty is directly attributable to Reaganomics and trickle down and Executive Bonuses causing offshoring of jobs.
chatmandu002 posted at 11:46 am on Mon, Jul 23, 2012.
Willie,
I guess being treated equally doesn't mean anything to you and according to you, we must be a country of redistribution. OK I understand your point of view, just tell me what my "fair share" is.
Arizona Willie posted at 3:22 pm on Mon, Jul 23, 2012.
chatmandu002 ... not for me to say. Above my pay grade, as they say.
Rodini posted at 5:58 pm on Mon, Jul 23, 2012.
Good to see so many in agreement, especially from you Dale, as I know you are a conservative at heart, but disgusted with the far right extreme wing that has turned your party into a bunch of greedy, self-centered curmudgeons!!
Leon the Loon's comments can always be dismissed as he is "beyond salvage" as they say!
Keep spreading the TRUTH FOLKS! Stop these robber barons before it's too late! They only care about themselves...the rest of us be damned!
Rodini posted at 7:28 pm on Mon, Jul 23, 2012.
By the way Mr. Loon, you need to put away the crayons and climb down off your rocking horse right now! And don't forget to take off your rose-colored glasses too!
Take a DEEP BREATH...MAYBE TWO....then count to ten !!
Now actually READ the letter above and notice two things:
1st, these are official US government statistics...and
2nd, they show that America...(which is your country too)... grew faster economically and created far more jobs when the "top tax rates" were MORE THAN twice as high as they have been for the past 11 years. Are you still with me Mr. Loon?
Now look at the pathetic growth of our economy and how many jobs have been lost while top tax rates have been the lowest in American history over that same 11 year time frame.
What does that tell anyone willing to use his head for something other than beating against the wall. That a true American Patriot would obviously choose to see both the American economy and the 308 million Americans who are NOT millionaires, start sharing in the wealth that has flowed up so dramatically since Reagan's "TRICKLE -UP economics became the law of the land!
To actually choose to endorse dangerous politics that says it better for America to watch 5 million millionaires and billionaires get even richer while the rest of you see fewer jobs, lower wages, fewer benefits and far fewer services like a good education for your children, is really telling the world they are a self-centered egotists who don't give a rat's fanny about anyone besides themselves, isn't that about right ??
America runs better as a DEMOCRACY rather than as an OLIGARCHY!
mrconservative posted at 11:23 pm on Mon, Jul 23, 2012.
Actually, Rod, the vast majority of jobs are created by wealthy people. I, for one, will NEVER get a job from a poor person. Raisng taxes on the wealthy won't exactly help create jobs.
sockratties posted at 9:12 am on Tue, Jul 24, 2012.
Be careful not to paint with too wide of a brush. There are at least four types of jobs we’re talking about here… Unskilled, trades, skilled and professional. Unskilled jobs are those that require a few days of on the job training and labor. The trades such as plumbing, carpentry, machinist, mechanics, long distance drivers, and machine operators are learned through on the job training and apprenticeships. Skilled jobs include technicians, CPAs, medical workers, computer programmers and many design and development jobs. These jobs require at least a two or four year degree. Professional jobs include doctors, lawyers, educators, researchers and other careers requiring advanced degrees.
Many small businesses hire those in the trades such as electricians, plumbing, home repair, landscaping and handyman crafts. They also hire accountants, secretaries, clerical help and use the services of advertisers, salespeople and estimators. They hire unskilled laborers, gofers, drivers, janitors, etc. These business owners are not wealthy although their company may gross several hundred thousand dollars annually. The owner is the last one to get paid. They are more likely to re-invest any surplus earnings than a large corporation. They also support local businesses for services and supplies plus they buy vehicles, equipment and technology.
There is also the independent working contractor who has only one or two employees and is the main laborer of his or her company. This may be in the trades or a service function such as caterer or tourism.
Small businesses are the job creators that benefit most from a tax break because they don’t have the option of socking money away, investing it or hiring overseas labor. Giving a tax break to the wealthiest 1% won’t do these real job creators any good at all.
Arizona Willie posted at 9:54 am on Tue, Jul 24, 2012.
We agree socratties ... tax breaks for the 1% uber wealthy does not create jobs. They just sit on the money. With the tax breaks they have so much left after taxes they have little / no incentive to take their remaining money and start another company and hire more people.
Giving tax breaks to small business for each new employee they hire and retain for 1 year is a good idea.
Giving tax breaks to companies to move their operations to a cheap labor country is a BAD idea -- but we have been doing it for a long time now and wonder why there are not enough jobs in America now.
Rodini posted at 8:40 pm on Tue, Jul 24, 2012.
Mr. "Con"servative Man, you are wrong on two accounts!!
1st, very few jobs are created by wealthy people, the majority are created by large corporations and/or small businesses, of whom very few are millionaires.
2nd, you are quite haughty and proud when you announce "you'd never work for a poor man." Well lucky for you!
But let me tell you a little story and it's even a true story.
In 1977, just a few years out of college, I started a small painting business in MN with nothing but about $5,000 in credit cards.
In the summer months when work was plentiful, I had a crew of four young college age kids and one older professional working for me. In the winter, when jobs were scarce, I was only able to keep the older professional busy.
Now I paid those young college age kids $8.00/hr and I paid the older professional $10.00/hr; wages that were nearly twice the minimum wage at the time.
Now I was a poor man who lived from paycheck to paycheck. And there were times I told my crew that I couldn't cover their checks till the job we were working on was finished. But they trusted me to keep my word and none of them ever missed out on a dime.
Reality will remind us that millions of Americans have to work for "poor people" who are starting up a landscaping or plumbing business. Ot perhaps they are opening up a small restaurant or bookstore and have invested every penny they had or could borrow to get this business started and making payroll was an every week challenge!.
Most true patriotic Americans would know this and not be so arrogant when they show their true colors!
VofReason posted at 12:50 pm on Fri, Jul 27, 2012.
Let's make sure we are all on the same page. Are we saying that all of the money that the Government spends is well spent? There is no cronyism, fruad, waste going on? That the deficit spending going on is all absolutely necessary? Why exactly is so much talk on taking more money from anyone to continue this foolishness? And if you don't think it is foolishness, why would anyone be unwilling to pay in the same portion to keep it going- poor, rich or inbetween?