What if Trump does what he’s saying he’ll do?

This is a common argument among the far let that the tax rate was X long ago. As Paul Harvey, the famous radio announcer would say (Below) here is the REST of the story. (from Copilot)

During the 1950s, the top federal income tax rate stood at a staggering 91 percent for most of the decade. However, despite this high marginal rate, the top 1 percent of taxpayers*in that era only paid about 42 percent of their income in taxes. This effective tax rate accounts for all federal, state, and local taxes, including income, payroll, corporate, excise, property, and estate taxes.

In comparison, today's tax burden on high-income households is only **slightly lower** than what they faced in the 1950s. The average effective tax rate for the top 1 percent of Americans has declined slightly overall. In 2014, they paid an average tax rate of 36.4 percent.
But why the discrepancy between the high marginal rate and the effective rate? Here are a few reasons:

1. Bracket Application: The 91 percent bracket in the 1950s applied only to households with income over **$200,000** (equivalent to about **$2 million** in today's dollars). Fewer than **10,000 households** fell into this top bracket. Many households in the top 1 percent probably didn't even reach the 91 percent bracket initially¹.

2. **Income Subject to Top Bracket**: Even among households that did fall into the 91 percent bracket, not all their income was subject to that top rate. The 91 percent bracket applied only to income **above $200,000**, not every dollar earned by households. So, the majority of their income was not necessarily taxed at that rate¹.

3. **Other Taxes**: The 42.0 percent effective tax rate on the top 1 percent considered all taxes—federal, state, and local. When we focus specifically on **income taxes**, the top 1 percent paid an average effective rate of only **16.9 percent** during the 1950s¹.
In summary, while the 1950s had a jaw-dropping top marginal tax rate, the effective tax rate on high-income households was significantly lower due to these factors. Today's tax landscape, though slightly different, still maintains a comparable burden for the wealthiest taxpayers¹⁴.

 

Wrong. G.H. Bush had to increase taxes, because the deficit was skyrocketing. Clinton also had to raise taxes. These were both fiscally responsible moves, but unpopular.

 

Your 1950s data is in extreme conflict in 2 parts of your post.

 

The debt increased under Reagan due to defense spending which ultimately resulted in the demise of the Soviet Union. Clinton benefited from this by reduced defense spending resulting in surpluses. Clinton’s first two years were not economically successful. He triangulated with Gingrich’s contract with America policies and the economy took off helped by the high tech bubble. The tax rate increases were a damper on economic growth.

 

How is that? JFK knew that high rates were detrimental to economic growth.

 

There's no reason to ask kids to be vaccinated for covid. You'll have to show that he meant all of these other vaccines.

 

You're right with your jugdement of AFM, but there is a reason, and there is always a reason, why so much people get addicted, and these reasons are homemade. To solve this, first there has to grow an awareness that this is a problem, and then try to solve it without blaming other countries or left/right politicians.

 

There is a problem and it is exacerbated by the Chinese Communist Party who employs Sun Tzo's Art of War to weaken the United States without firing a shot. Wake up!!

Schweizer, Peter. Blood Money: Why the Powerful Turn a Blind Eye While China Kills Americans (pp. 6-7). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

 

The source is printed at the bottom of the chart.read it.

 

There is no link. It's a bogus argument to blame Trump or any other President for payroll taxes (social security and medicare) plus state and local taxes.

 

Trump's plan is to implement a 10% tariff on all imports, no exceptions.

He admits the cost will be paid by the consumer.

 

That illegal immigrants are bringing in fentanyl. That's pure fiction. So why do you push it?

 

Fentanyl from Mexico manufactured by the Chinese Communist Party is smuggled across the open southern border.

 

What is the source for that?

 

Explain.

 

Yes, smuggled in trucks, at regular border crossing points. Illegal immigrants have nothing to do with it.

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-new-tariffs-election-2024-trade-war-joe-biden-2023-8

 

His argument is that it would be overall a benefit for consumers. Where does Trump state that consumers would pay for the tariffs by 10% price increases on imports?

 

Where do I claim that illegal aliens are bringing in all the fentanyl across the southern border?

 

This was stated - "During the 1950s, the top federal income tax rate stood at a staggering 91 percent for most of the decade. However, despite this high marginal rate, the top 1 percent of taxpayers*in that era only paid about 42 percent of their income in taxes."

and this was stated - "The 42.0 percent effective tax rate on the top 1 percent considered all taxes—federal, state, and local. When we focus specifically on **income taxes**, the top 1 percent paid an average effective rate of only **16.9 percent** during the 1950s¹."

Just doesn't make sense to me. Also, if you do somehow justify this confusing verbage, then what about the '60s and '70s? Upper tier rates were still high, but maybe some of the loopholes were closed. The deficit was very manageable during those years.

 

Spending is the p[roblem. Not taxes. Government is now a bloated DEI farm.

 

Taxpayers

Now he is saying he'll slap 60% tax on some goods

According to who, or what?

Yes, Trump tax cuts came with 20% hike in spending, and deficits went through the roof almost immediately

For a long time he thought China was paying it. IMO he still thinks it

 

Spending cuts alone will not solve the current deficit situation. But I agree that we need spending cuts.

 

At this point I agree because even Trump over spent. What it is going to take unfortunately is a major recession and even a depression along with someone like Vivek to step in and slash government. I read the other day that the average government salary $60.00 an hour which is substantially higher than the private sector and that doesn't include benefits.

 

Those making $40k do not pay 15% income tax.

Democrats vote for spending increases. They refuse to balance the books.

The reason for applying the tariffs is to adjust prices of Chinese goods to their fair value because the Chinese Communist Party subsidizes Chinese industry.