General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow past income tax rate cuts on the wealthy affected the economy
By TYLER FISHER at Politico
https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/gop-tax-rate-cut-wealthy/
"SNIP...........
The Congressional Research Service published a paper in 2012 that found no correlation between top tax rates and economic growth. Congressional Republicans protested the findings, and the service briefly withdrew the paper.
Republicans argued that the CRS paper had methodological errors, namely that it didn't account for the long-term benefits of tax rate cuts. The paper looked only at effects on growth within the first year of the cuts.
POLITICO looked at each time the country changed the top income tax rate and the following five years of GDP per capita growth rate. The results are similar to the CRS findings: changing the top income tax rate does not have a predictable effect on economic growth.
............SNIP"
Gothmog
(145,243 posts)angstlessk
(11,862 posts)And EVERYONE know it!
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Who could have ever guessed?
The_Casual_Observer
(27,742 posts)The things that really supercharge the economy - like they said on NPR this am
applegrove
(118,659 posts)The_Casual_Observer
(27,742 posts)value to the economy at all, but it's where they "shop" Sotheby's, Christies etc.
cbreezen
(694 posts)and try to tell me it's raining...
They've tried this at least twice in my lifetime and they'll keep doing it as long as people keep voting for the flag, God and country.
Cicada
(4,533 posts)The top federal marginal tax rate when JFK was elected was 91%. He passed a 10% tax credit on investment purchases. The money a rich person could keep went from 9% to 19%. That's a huge change so maybe it is not surprising that it stimulated growth. When Reagan was elected the top rate was 70% and it was lowered to 28%, so after tax income rose from 30% to 72%, again a huge incentive. But now tax cuts have far less impact because they start much lower. Bush Jr lowered the top rate from 39.6% to 35%. After tax income rose only 12%, not the more than 100% under JFK and Reagan, so maybe the failure of that cut to generate much economic growth makes sense. In our low tax rate world we probably shouldn't expect tax cuts to do much. In addition economic rationality, the super smart invisible hand of the market, can see that a tax cut now when we have a deficit will simply lead to higher rates tomorrow to pay back the larger national debt. So if the invisible hand of the market is as smart as conservatives say it is then it will see that current tax cuts are illusory, mere mirages. So the failure of lowering top tax rates to reliably increase economic growth should not surprise us. Odd that conservatives are too economically illiterate to understand those points.
ProfessorGAC
(65,042 posts)The ridiculous military build up, using borrowed money, created return income as corporate taxes from the MIC firms.
If one adjusts for the 25% return on the borrowed money, the growth in revenue based on the tax cuts becomes illusory!
Cicada
(4,533 posts)I obsessively read yet you are the first person I have seen to make that excellent point. Post more articles please.
world wide wally
(21,743 posts)A capitalist economy is always based on demand for the product. It doesn't matter how much of a product is supplied if nobody wants it or can afford to buy it.
Pure bullshit.