When tax rates drop, revenue rises

  • Follow Letters

The biggest falsehood airing today is that we need to raise tax rates on the rich so that they will pay their "fair share."

Have you never wondered why the liberals/ Democrats never brag about how the revenues just gushed in when they raised taxes on the rich? That is because when taxes are raised, the rich pay less in taxes, both in terms of a percent of total taxes paid by all incomes and in real dollars.

The truth, according to the IRS tax revenue tables, is as follows: In 1980, when the highest tax rate was 70 percent, the richest 1 percent paid 19 percent of all taxes. In 2005, with the highest tax rate at 35 percent, after the Bush tax cuts, the richest 1 percent paid 39.38 percent of all taxes, the highest percent ever and double what they paid at 70 percent!

The tax rate was cut in half on the rich. They paid twice the percent of total taxes and also by far the most ever in real dollars! Does that sound like the rich didn't pay their fair share?

A minor advantage of the rich making all of that money: They hired so many people, the highest unemployment rate in the Bush years was lower than the lowest unemployment rate in the Clinton years. Six million jobs were created as the result of the Bush tax cuts.

Then the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006, and introduced trillion-dollar deficits that have killed the economy and introduced the highest unemployment in decades.

These are the facts.

Gary Lawhead

Evans

Comments (95) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Jackson
0
Points
Jackson 12/03/10 - 12:13 am
0
0
My American flag says it was

My American flag says it was made in China. I'm serious. Doesn't the USA make anything anymore?
I'm all for tax cuts for the rich or anyone starting a business. I'm for any kind of tax cut if it will help provide jobs.

faithson
5158
Points
faithson 12/03/10 - 12:34 am
0
0
It is fascinating to read the

It is fascinating to read the conservative 'herd' mentality so eloquently parroted. As I am wont to say: " Lies are often much more plausible, more appealing to reason, than reality, since the liar has the great advantage of knowing beforehand what the audience wishes or expects to hear." Do you think that all those people who drank Jim Jones kool aid were hearing from him 'what they wished or expected to HEAR' ? ahhh, yea !

Asitisinaug
3
Points
Asitisinaug 12/03/10 - 01:57 am
0
0
News Headline Today - $130

News Headline Today - $130 MILLION in tax credit checks issued last year to persons in PRISON. Yeah, we really need to raise taxes another 6% on hardworking successfull small business persons who make $250,000.00 per year - that will really help to create jobs.

Bottom line is this, the federal government under either party wastes trillions each year. All of their agencies are rampant with fraud and waste and few run very effectively - just go wait in line at the Post Office as they loose millions and give their chief officers very nice bonuses.

If you want to give YOUR money to the government, then by all means, please do so. Funny how so many liberal thinkers pay their accountants to find every tax break possible and/or cheat on their taxes while at the same time verbally stating they need to be raised. If you want to add 6% or more to what you owe this year then please do so but if not, then stop trying to pass laws to make others pay more.

No one is giving the rich or anyone else a tax cut from the current rates, they are simply saying it is not in the best interest of the USA to raise taxes on anyone, especially at this time. No one thinks taxes should be raised on the poor, no one seem to think taxes should be raised on those making $200,000.00 or so each year but God forbid, you own a small business, employee individuals, happen to make $250,000.00 or more next year (which already puts you paying the highest percentage) and liberals / democrats wish to reward you for your hard work and dedication by increasing your bill to the government by another 6%.

You can try to justify this anyway you wish but it is absutely absurd. the government does not need more money to waste, it needs to stop wasting money and spending that which it does not have.

Faithson, please discredit ANYTHING the letter writer wrote since you call him a liar - Everything stated is easily verified by simply using Google and a minimal amount of research. We can all disagree on right and wrong or the best way to acheive our goals but the facts stated are verifable and acurate no matter how you and others try to spin it. So, did you pay every penny owed to the Feds and ADD some extra to help them out? If not, you should be ashamed of yourslef.

Frankly, giving to almost ANY charity is far better than giving to the federal government. This enabling administration rewards negative behavior and punishes hard working Americans through the expansion and extension of the many ridiculous social programs. Yes, we should help those that CAN NOT help theirselves. However, providing housing, food, money (tax credits), transportation, etc. to able bodied non-productive members of society enables them to continue to live off of the government dole. Have another child, get more government money. Stay out of work for longer than a year, no problem, we will extend your benefits. Live in government housing for 15 years and complain because you are being moved down the road and our governments response is we will send free movers, moving trucks and pay you for your troubles (happend last year in Augusta). However, invest in a business, pay for all kinds of permits and fees, hire employees (create jobs), pay your taxes from the highest tax bracket and your reward is......pay 6% more please along with increases from the state, county and often towns not to mention (as in Augusta) up to a 10% fee hike in business licenses, etc.

“You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the industrious out of it. You don’t multiply wealth by dividing it. Government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn’t first take from somebody else. Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for half of the people to get the idea they don’t have to work because somebody else will work for them, and the other half to get the idea that it does no good to work because they don’t get to enjoy the fruit of their labor.”

Jon Lester
2304
Points
Jon Lester 12/03/10 - 03:59 am
0
0
Like centrifugal force, the

Like centrifugal force, the 'Laffer Curve' has the appearance of something measurable and predictable but is not, in fact, a real phenomenon. Revenues rise with reduced rates only when the action induces improved compliance, or if the reform removes especially inhibitive restrictions, and even in the most dramatic historical examples (e.g. when Kennedy cut the top rate from 91% to 70%), the effect is only temporary. Flash forward to today, and we find that the US already had the highest compliance rate in the world in 2001, and that the performance of the economy in the years since has paled in comparison to the Clinton era. Additionally, the academic arguments bandied about today are made without mention of existing options available to any American of high net worth, particularly the opportunity to invest in municipal bonds, the returns on which would be taxed at only 15% upon maturity (and America's local governments could use that investment for the sake of not overburdening their constituents). In case you've forgotten, it was widely known in 2004 that Teresa Heinz-Kerry was smart enough to exercise this option. I guarantee you that every financial advisor serving the nation's top 2% of income earners is perfectly aware of all of the above.

omnomnom
3964
Points
omnomnom 12/03/10 - 06:25 am
0
0
eh, accrediting those tax

eh, accrediting those tax cuts to job creation is a bit of a stretch. surely the EZ-credit ponzi economy had nothing to do with it. didn't this whole downturn start in 08? did we ever really recover from the 2001 recession?

Sandpiper
0
Points
Sandpiper 12/03/10 - 06:23 am
0
0
Take apples, mix in some

Take apples, mix in some oranges and compare them to bananas and you get a fruit salad that makes all fruit appear to be the same to the uninformed and easily confused.
Mr Lawhead presented facts available from the IRS and was answered with the typical spin repeated daily by the broadcast media and their allies on cable.
The Department of Education has provided us with too many ignorant citizens.

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 12/03/10 - 06:44 am
0
0
Gary: How about a source for

Gary: How about a source for your info? According to that bastion of liberalism, the WSJ, 3 million jobs were created under the entire 8 years of the Bush administration. http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/01/09/bush-on-jobs-the-worst-track-r...

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 12/03/10 - 07:06 am
0
0
And just exactly why are the

And just exactly why are the wealthy paying a higher percent in taxes? Between 1976 and 2007, 58% of income growth went to the top 1%. Between 2001 and 2007, the top 1% snagged 66% of income growth. http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=2908

nofanofobama
6825
Points
nofanofobama 12/03/10 - 07:10 am
0
0
facts and figures dont matter

facts and figures dont matter to the ideologue leftist. they want without earning and have a socialist govt to do there bidding..

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 12/03/10 - 07:22 am
0
0
They obviously don't matter

They obviously don't matter to the idealogue rightist.

overburdened_taxpayer
117
Points
overburdened_taxpayer 12/03/10 - 07:22 am
0
0
Higher taxes is exactly why

Higher taxes is exactly why we don't "make anything in America" anymore. Being the country with the second highest business taxes pushed most manufacturers out of the country. If they didn't have to pay such high taxes they could have afforded to stay in the country AND pay a decent livable wage to the American worker.

overburdened_taxpayer
117
Points
overburdened_taxpayer 12/03/10 - 07:26 am
0
0
Then the unemployment rate

Then the unemployment rate would not be so high and you would have more workers paying income taxes. But no, let's bilk the "rich" business owners and run them out of the country.

The government lost all that income tax AND business tax by their stupidity.

Rhetor
1011
Points
Rhetor 12/03/10 - 07:46 am
0
0
1. The rich are paying less

1. The rich are paying less in taxes under Obama than under Reagan. Did Fox News forget to tell you about Obama's numerous tax breaks and tax cuts? 2. What makes people think that Obama extended welfare for people who have extra babies? That counterproductive program was cut way back under Clinton and was never revived. 3. There has been a steady redistribution of income over the past decades from the poor to the rich. That can't go on forever. All the Dems are talking about is to slow the trend a bit.

Rhetor
1011
Points
Rhetor 12/03/10 - 07:48 am
0
0
BTW, the Laffer curve is

BTW, the Laffer curve is silly. Yes, cutting taxes increases income which increases revenue, but not enough to compensate for the tax cuts. This is particularly true when you cut taxes on the rich, who are more likely to save large portions of their income than to spend it.

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 12/03/10 - 08:03 am
0
0
wiz: Where the heck do you

wiz: Where the heck do you get your erroneous info? $800 million? Try researching instead of taking what you read on loon websites at face value.

slippery 25
0
Points
slippery 25 12/03/10 - 08:11 am
0
0
You are trying to keep your

You are trying to keep your buisness going. The new healthcare law has stuck you with more expenses . Know the idiots want to increase your taxes. Might be time to close down.

wizzardx1
0
Points
wizzardx1 12/03/10 - 08:12 am
0
0
Techfan, Why spend a DIME on

Techfan, Why spend a DIME on it?

wizzardx1
0
Points
wizzardx1 12/03/10 - 08:20 am
0
0
Techfan,please tell us why,in

Techfan,please tell us why,in this economy,should our taxes be spent to teach african men to wash their genitals. Wouldn't that money be better spent on keeping our school teachers in our classrooms?

chucktoons
0
Points
chucktoons 12/03/10 - 08:24 am
0
0
Sounds like the liberals have

Sounds like the liberals have it all figured out. The more each of us give to the gov, the more the gov tells us what we can and cannot do, the more they give us so they we can take care of ourselves, the better off we all are. I think we should all give everything we have to the gov and we will begin inhaling and exhaling on demand.

wizzardx1
0
Points
wizzardx1 12/03/10 - 08:26 am
0
0
Well,Tech? please(asking

Well,Tech? please(asking nicely) explain why ANY tax money should be spent to teach african men how to wash their genitals.

wizzardx1
0
Points
wizzardx1 12/03/10 - 08:35 am
0
0
I wonder if the government

I wonder if the government will give me $100 million to teach dolphins to pick grapes?

skeptic griggsy
39
Points
skeptic griggsy 12/03/10 - 08:39 am
0
0
Again, lovers of the never
Unpublished

Again, lovers of the never was, the never land where charity could not take care of the needy and the unemployed, define socialism.
Again, most of the needy adults will work when given a job, indeed many had jobs until let off, and others are disabled,even to the naked eye. Please stop the comparison of them to parasites as that is so akin to Stalin calling the Kulaks parasites.
The " Laugher-er" curve is a distortion of the principle of diminishing returns. The amount of taxes should be based on what society needs and the ability to pay progressively-that pinch.Under our social contract, the Constitution, that comes through the progressive income tax., which delivers more revenue to that diminishing return enters the scene.
Taxes are not theft and do not punish anyone! They are our duty to society for our needs. And the police forces do not use jack boots to collect taxes but rather use their powers when necessary to collect that money from the tax evaders in accordance with democratic, justifiable law as noted.
The Kennedy one as noted was not only temporary but was geared to the middle-class whereas the Ronzo and Shrub ones were geared to the very affluent, who invested as noted without making jobs.
The government does not waste trillions, just millions. That hyperbole does not wash!
Neither the Tennessee Valley Authority nor the bailout of the two automobile companies has led to the socialist take-over of property. Indeed, the federal government has less ownership of GM now and no coercive role in it. Again, so much for hyperbole!
Again, define socialism! To adapt socialist proposals has not led to government ownership.The new health system is geared not only to help the many but to help the insurance industry whereas the Medicare-Medicaid for all that I favour is just a payout system without the vast costs of the insurance bureaucrats, and still would permit private health insurance as now under Medicare.
What I propose is not like that of the socialized British system as the federal and state governments still would not own any hospitals and the doctors would still be private employers themselves.
Again define that scare word socialism without that straw man! Remember whence the source of a proposal independent of its worth. So, that the libertarian one to deregulate that Pres. Ford started and Pres. Carter and Sen. Kennedy kicked big time was not creeping libertarianism!At that time, I applauded the deregulation, but it went to far! Legislatures have to review from time to time the effects of regulation so as to assure a proper form. The regulated, free market means that the regulations allow for the proper competition and consumer protections. And so that isn't like jumbo shrimp!
Please don't use misguided statistics, folks! Trickle down is just the transition from ones check book to ones stocks and such, not a job creator.
Yes, I'm creative!

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 12/03/10 - 08:39 am
0
0
overburd: If your thesis

overburd: If your thesis held, we should be overrun with products made in Ireland, since they have about the lowest corporate tax rate. The only Irish product I can find in our house is some Guinness in the fridge. It's not taxes, it's wages. Corporations in this country are no longer satisfied with modest profits. They are selling out our country to make the big score. They can obtain labor at 12% of US wages (Mexico), 5% (China) or 2% (Sri Lanka). Workers in the US couldn't exist on these third world wages.

wizzardx1
0
Points
wizzardx1 12/03/10 - 08:43 am
0
0
Techfa,why should taxes be

Techfa,why should taxes be increased when teaching african men to wash their genitals comes ahead of saving our own teachers?

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 12/03/10 - 08:47 am
0
0
wiz:STD (especially AIDS)

wiz:STD (especially AIDS) prevention.

wizzardx1
0
Points
wizzardx1 12/03/10 - 08:50 am
0
0
Wouldn't that money be better

Wouldn't that money be better spent on preventing AIDS in the U.S.?

justthefacts
22010
Points
justthefacts 12/03/10 - 08:54 am
0
0
I guess, the theory is as

I guess, the theory is as soon as we raise taxes, businesses are going to go hire more people and pay them a higher wage. Sounds great!

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 12/03/10 - 08:59 am
0
0
Both. It's hard to eliminate

Both. It's hard to eliminate communicable diseases if you only cover one geographical area. What good would it do to give smallpox vaccines to Ga residents but not SC residents.?

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 12/03/10 - 09:03 am
0
0
just: No, but it would

just: No, but it would improve the deficit and debt.

wizzardx1
0
Points
wizzardx1 12/03/10 - 09:10 am
0
0
So,techfa,we should take care

So,techfa,we should take care of african men BEFORE we take care of citizens?

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs