Name Lips
10-21-2009, 02:35 PM
The deficit as a percentage of GDP has reached its highest level since the WWII era. We all know this is a bad thing - but the theory is that it was done to prevent a second Great Depression.
The logical thing then, once the economy stabilizes, would be to shift the focus onto reducing the deficit.
The most efficient way to do this would be to raise taxes and cut programs -- but it's the extensive programs that are fueling the recovery. Conservatives argue that tax cuts will fuel a recovery, but liberals say that they're just keeping an eye on their own pocketbooks.
It was massive government spending and tax hikes that finally propelled America out of the Great Depression, and I'm thinking we will be in store for some of that in the coming 2 years. Observe, if you will, the following graph (from here (http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php)):
http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates-graph.php
It occurs to me as interesting that the decades many consider to be the Golden Age of 20th century America - the 40s through 60s - saw the highest income tax rates the country has ever known - above 90% in the top brackets.
Just think about that for a bit. Think about it. 90% income tax on the wealthiest individuals - most of whom were still ridiculously wealthy just on their remaining 10%.
We've been there, and not only did it not destroy the country, we seemed to be doing just fine during that time!
I don't want to go all Edena with the paragraph breaks, but it boggles my mind.
It just boggles my mind.
Thinking about it, a much smaller tax increase - like to 40 or 50% in the wealthiest brackets - should be able to solve all our financial woes, in just a year or two. No deficit. No debt. Health care for all. Massive military spending to muscle through a firm victory against Al-Qaida. No more underfunded schools. No more Social Security worries.
How exactly is this a bad idea? What dire consequences would befall us if this was done? And after the debt and deficit were eliminated, the taxes could even be lowered a bit to compensate.
It seems to me more logical to raise taxes in the short term to get the money we need, instead of piling on debt. I know piling on debt makes me have to pay more in the long run when I do it. So shouldn't it be cheaper in the long run to run the country with real money instead? That is to say, TAX and spend. Don't skip the TAX part.
The logical thing then, once the economy stabilizes, would be to shift the focus onto reducing the deficit.
The most efficient way to do this would be to raise taxes and cut programs -- but it's the extensive programs that are fueling the recovery. Conservatives argue that tax cuts will fuel a recovery, but liberals say that they're just keeping an eye on their own pocketbooks.
It was massive government spending and tax hikes that finally propelled America out of the Great Depression, and I'm thinking we will be in store for some of that in the coming 2 years. Observe, if you will, the following graph (from here (http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php)):
http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates-graph.php
It occurs to me as interesting that the decades many consider to be the Golden Age of 20th century America - the 40s through 60s - saw the highest income tax rates the country has ever known - above 90% in the top brackets.
Just think about that for a bit. Think about it. 90% income tax on the wealthiest individuals - most of whom were still ridiculously wealthy just on their remaining 10%.
We've been there, and not only did it not destroy the country, we seemed to be doing just fine during that time!
I don't want to go all Edena with the paragraph breaks, but it boggles my mind.
It just boggles my mind.
Thinking about it, a much smaller tax increase - like to 40 or 50% in the wealthiest brackets - should be able to solve all our financial woes, in just a year or two. No deficit. No debt. Health care for all. Massive military spending to muscle through a firm victory against Al-Qaida. No more underfunded schools. No more Social Security worries.
How exactly is this a bad idea? What dire consequences would befall us if this was done? And after the debt and deficit were eliminated, the taxes could even be lowered a bit to compensate.
It seems to me more logical to raise taxes in the short term to get the money we need, instead of piling on debt. I know piling on debt makes me have to pay more in the long run when I do it. So shouldn't it be cheaper in the long run to run the country with real money instead? That is to say, TAX and spend. Don't skip the TAX part.