Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: US Lowest Tax Burden for 60 years

  1. #1
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782

    US Lowest Tax Burden for 60 years

    if wondering why there's such a huge deficit... here's a good reason why...



    from Reuters


    This chart should be ingrained in the mind of anybody who cares about fiscal policy. The main things to note:

    Federal taxes are the lowest in 60 years, which gives you a pretty good idea of why America’s long-term debt ratios are a big problem. If the taxes reverted to somewhere near their historical mean, the problem would be solved at a stroke.

    Income taxes, in particular, both personal and corporate, are low and falling. That trend is not sustainable.

    Employment taxes, by contrast—the regressive bit of the fiscal structure—are bearing a large and increasing share of the brunt. Any time that somebody starts complaining about how the poor don’t pay income tax, point them to this chart. Income taxes are just one part of the pie, and everybody with a job pays employment taxes.

    There aren’t any wealth taxes, but the closest thing we’ve got—estate and gift taxes—have shrunk to zero, after contributing a non-negligible amount to the public fisc in earlier decades.

    If you were structuring a tax code from scratch, it would look nothing like this. But the problem is that tax hikes seem to be politically impossible no matter which party is in power. And since any revamp of the tax code would involve tax hikes somewhere, I fear we’re fiscally doomed.

  2. #2
    All League
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,565
    Quote Originally Posted by bitonti View Post
    if wondering why there's such a huge deficit... here's a good reason why...



    from Reuters
    Pure genius! Spending has nothing to do with it. 50% of Americans pay no taxes maybe they should start. We also have state, school districts and local govs reaming our asses like never before. Oh and btw, I sure the Socialist Greeks are enjoying the 54 billion we sent through the IMF so they can lay on the beach retired at 50. All you libs crack me up.

  3. #3
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Quote Originally Posted by acepepe View Post
    50% of Americans pay no taxes maybe they should start. .
    read the article, everyone who has a job pays employment tax. and that's the only part that seems to go up.

  4. #4
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Any time that somebody starts complaining about how the poor don’t pay income tax, point them to this chart. Income taxes are just one part of the pie, and everybody with a job pays employment taxes.
    The complaint is Net taxes. Something I am sure thw riter was well aware of, and simply chose to ignore to score political points.

    If you were structuring a tax code from scratch, it would look nothing like this.
    On this I agree, but I'd be what I'd design and what he would design would also look nothing alike.

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Quote Originally Posted by bitonti View Post
    if wondering why there's such a huge deficit... here's a good reason why...



    from Reuters
    Give you a better reason. Spending as a percent of GDP in 1950 was 23.95% it's 43.85% in 2010.

    http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...html#copypaste

  6. #6
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs View Post
    Give you a better reason. Spending as a percent of GDP in 1950 was 23.95% it's 43.85% in 2010.
    Nice source.

    From 6% of $25 billion to 44% of 15 trillion in 100 years.

    One has to ask, what are we getting for all the spending, exactly?

  7. #7
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Farmingdale, NY
    Posts
    2,535
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Nice source.

    From 6% of $25 billion to 44% of 15 trillion in 100 years.

    One has to ask, what are we getting for all the spending, exactly?
    A 9 year war in Afghanistan.

    A 7 year war in Iraq.

    Social Security that lets people retire at 63 (while average life expectancy has increased to 78.4 - http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=...+united+states - from about 59 -http://kclibrary.lonestar.edu/decade30.html - from the 1930's to now)

    Those are just a couple.

  8. #8
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    A 9 year war in Afghanistan.

    A 7 year war in Iraq.
    6000 mile supply lines cost alot.

    they say by the time a 3$ gallon of gas arrives in Afghanistan, it's a 400$ gallon of gas.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    A 9 year war in Afghanistan.

    A 7 year war in Iraq.

    Social Security that lets people retire at 63 (while average life expectancy has increased to 78.4 - http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=...+united+states - from about 59 -http://kclibrary.lonestar.edu/decade30.html - from the 1930's to now)

    Those are just a couple.
    Spending is still way higher then during the VN war when we had 500K troops on the ground.

  10. #10
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Quote Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs View Post
    Spending is still way higher then during the VN war when we had 500K troops on the ground.
    another quality use of blood and treasure.

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Quote Originally Posted by bitonti View Post
    another quality use of blood and treasure.
    When it comes to wasting blood and treasure liberal democrats are clearly just as effective as Republicans.

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,400
    Quote Originally Posted by acepepe View Post
    Pure genius! Spending has nothing to do with it. 50% of Americans pay no taxes maybe they should start. We also have state, school districts and local govs reaming our asses like never before. Oh and btw, I sure the Socialist Greeks are enjoying the 54 billion we sent through the IMF so they can lay on the beach retired at 50. All you libs crack me up.
    ya think???

    if you take home less money yet spend more money you're fuked....unless of course you believe in failed policies like keynesian economics- then somehow spending more and more no matter how much you take in is a good thing...lol...

  13. #13
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Farmingdale, NY
    Posts
    2,535
    Quote Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs View Post
    Spending is still way higher then during the VN war when we had 500K troops on the ground.
    Government spending was roughly 30% of the GDP during the height of Vietnam.

    We're 14% higher now.

    But we also just suffered the worst financial collapse since the Great Depression and the federal government is trying to fix the economy through spending.

    Them's be the reasons'.

  14. #14
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    Government spending was roughly 30% of the GDP during the height of Vietnam.

    We're 14% higher now.

    But we also just suffered the worst financial collapse since the Great Depression and the federal government is trying to fix the economy through spending.

    Them's be the reasons'.
    We suffered a pretty comparable recession in the Carter into Reagan Presidency and that was coupled with double digit inflation. Don't let the news cycle of doom for ratings fool you.

    This is bad, we have been through just as bad in my lifetime and we don't have tent cities in Central Park like we did in the great depression.

  15. #15
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Farmingdale, NY
    Posts
    2,535
    Quote Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs View Post
    We suffered a pretty comparable recession in the Carter into Reagan Presidency and that was coupled with double digit inflation. Don't let the news cycle of doom for ratings fool you.

    This is bad, we have been through just as bad in my lifetime and we don't have tent cities in Central Park like we did in the great depression.
    You're missing my point.

    Neither the Savings and Loan crisis under Reagan, nor the recession during the Carter administration happened while we were fighting to wars in two different middle eastern countries.

    In fact, we were at peace both times.

  16. #16
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    You're missing my point.

    Neither the Savings and Loan crisis under Reagan, nor the recession during the Carter administration happened while we were fighting to wars in two different middle eastern countries.

    In fact, we were at peace both times.
    If you want to consider the cold war peace times I disagree strongly. We spent an absolute fortune to win the cold war and won it because our economic system had the ability to out produce our competitors.

    The social contract expansion portion of our government has become to big a drag on our economy to continue to be both a growing economic power and super power on the world stage.

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs View Post
    We spent an absolute fortune to win the cold war...
    Yes. We made enough nuclear weapons to kill everyone on Earth 12 times. You know...because people are like zombies and you usually have to kill them multiple times.


  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    Yes. We made enough nuclear weapons to kill everyone on Earth 12 times. You know...because people are like zombies and you usually have to kill them multiple times.

    Much of the expense was in delivery so that we could insure a response strike against a first strike.

    MAD only works if you can insure that you can launch a sufficiently deadly return strike. If our nuclear arsenal could be fully targeted on a first strike MAD was no longer a reasonable deterrent.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us