Posted on 10/25/2010 4:56:32 PM PDT by Kaslin
Classic songs from years past are sometimes referred to as "golden oldies." There are political fallacies that have been around for a long time as well. These might be called brass oldies. It certainly takes a lot of brass to keep repeating fallacies that were refuted long ago.
One of these brass oldies is a phrase that has been a perennial favorite of the left, "tax cuts for the rich." How long ago was this refuted? More than 80 years ago, the "tax cuts for the rich" argument was refuted, both in theory and in practice, by Andrew Mellon, who was secretary of the Treasury in the 1920s.
When Mellon took office, there was a large national debt, the economy was stagnating and tax rates were high, though the tax revenues were still not enough to cover government expenditures. What was Mellon's prescription for getting out of this mess? A series of major cuts in the tax rates!
Then as now, there were people who failed to make the distinction between tax rates and tax revenues. Mellon said, "It seems difficult for some to understand that high rates of taxation do not necessarily mean large revenue for the government, and that more revenue may often be obtained by lower rates."
How can that be? Because taxpayers change their behavior according to what the tax rates are. When one of the Rockefellers died, Mellon discovered that his estate included $44 million in tax-exempt bonds, compared with $7 million in Standard Oil securities, even though Standard Oil was the source of the Rockefeller fortune.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Ping
A “bail-out” for business to supposedly encourage jobs was OK.
Giving business owners a tax break is, however, considered pandering to the rich.
Instead of tax breaks, let’s call them “Hiring Breaks” directed at employers.
Its not about tax revenues for Obama as he said on the campaign trail. Alinsky, Marx and others wanted to steal money from the haves and give it to the have-nots.
If they want to tax the rich..tax the wealth of the countries billionaires who support taxing the income of the wanabe rich. Gates and Buffett could pay say..5% of their total wealth each year..with no deduction for charitable giving.
Why not? Anyone with a net worth over 500m pays 5% a year..
That would be taxing the rich.
Right now everybody over 70 must make withdrawals and pay taxes on their 401k. They could even just make the same rule for the rich. Each year you must cash in 1% of your capital gains and pay tax on it..
My pleasure
My pleasure
But did they really give it to the have-nots?
Also, why not eliminate the tax exemptions for state and local government bonds?
Because the IDIOT MORONS we have runnng the republican party after 80 years have not prepared their peoplw for that debate- that something like 80% of all taxes are paid by 5% of the richest people
Maybe it is time to eliminate the difference in taxation between profit and non profit.
The wealthy can find ways to keep their wealth through the use of non profit foundations. The Ford family kept control of Ford through the donation of non voting stock to the Ford Foundation.
Wealth shouldn’t be taxed, as it is our responsibility to pay for the current operation of government (normal operations of public safety and defense). Government shouldn’t be allowed to mortgage our future by spending on unnecessary activities and using debt so that our current taxes do not fully pay for present annual operations of government.
We need to take the government off the cash method of accounting and be responsibile for reporting all incurred expenditures and debt.
or how I saved a bundle by parking my yacht in Rhode Island
It is worse than that, scooby. Obama wants the economy to fail, period. Then the necessity for a government take over will be evident and acceptable. That is what they want. More than that they want a global collapse and a one world government to "remedy" the problem.
"In short, these were tax cuts for the economy, even if the left likes to call them "tax cuts for the rich."
Envy’s not a deadly sin for nothing. It has the power to destroy whole living, breathing, healthy economies. Destructive to its core and deadly is envy.
You put that into words well. What Dr. Sowell says in a few words clearly takes many writers paragraphs to explain and it’s still not clear in many cases.
We need to take the government off the cash method of accounting and be responsibile for reporting all incurred expenditures and debt.
AMEN. Well said. Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.