I pay income tax and am fully prepared to pay more, I believe in deficit reduction and the only way to eliminate the deficit is a combination of tax hikes and spending cuts.
He's talking about the top bracket. http://www.businessinsider.com/history-of-tax-rates?op=1 They've been as high as 94% on the top bracket. And a graph like this is what makes some of us shake our heads at a Grover Norquist and the like. How about we just flatten the regression line here?
I think you are confusing two groups. The rich, selfish people who happened to live at the same time as the Greatest Generation reluctantly paid 90% and they hated FDR for it. And he welcomed their hate...
I think we need to take a serious lesson from 1993, when the top rates went from 28% to 40%. Obviously, it destroyed small business owners and ruined the economy of the 1990's, so it's clear that going from 35% to 38% would do the same.
Or we could just completely eliminate the income tax and then the job creators would obviously invest all of that extra money and the economy would create 4 million jobs per month and the unemployment rate would drop to -5%.
Not confusing, just ignoring the rich, selfish people. The "Greatest Generation" as a whole was willing to sacrifice and live with high marginal tax rates in order to accomplish the things our society accomplished at the time.
Here you go. In every year from 1944 to 1963, the top marginal tax rate was over 90%. http://taxfoundation.org/article/us...-2011-nominal-and-inflation-adjusted-brackets
More from Silver. This map shows how the candidates did compared to what the state polls predicted. The meaning of the colors and shading should be obvious. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...obama-and-romney-beat-their-polls/#more-37611
I was just plugged into like 100 info sources and didn't think to come around. I wish I had. It would have been fun. Tonight I got bored and didn't have anything to do and finally started reading this thread from election night on and it's a ball reliving the whole thing over again. Just one piece of good news after another on the presidential, every competitive Senate seat this side of Kerrey/Nebraska, marriage equality winning on all four ballots it appeared on, legal pot winning twice... It's easy to forget what an amazing night it was. Most it's easy to forget because John Boehner and Mitch McConnell continue to pretend it didn't happen. Two wins, neither close, and the just-whipped opposition is still pretending "compromise" means adopting their positions exactly. It really is amazing. I still have dozens of pages to go. I hope texx and basso show up again. Not holding my breath for either but it would be funny.
I'm sure it's been posted already in this thread (I still have like 15 pages to go to catch up) but this can never be posted enough. Republicans should watch this over and over and over to understand what just happened to them so they can right their ship. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/e4699sVXbBo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
You are one of about five Republicans or Republican leaners that I've repped while reading this thread. There were some very classy statements from Romney supporters here. Of course, I haven't gotten to anything by the usual suspects yet since they were telling us they were going to win it free and clear.
If Hillary Clinton runs she'll win twice, easily, on her record and her incredible skills as a politician and as a person, no matter what job she's been in. And she's been in -- and excelled at -- more high level and differently demanding jobs than, I'd say, anyone in politics. She is the walking embodiment of experience in pretty much every area of government and she is a bad ass to boot and smarter than a dominatrix's whip. If she decides to run, Christie, Rubio, and Jeb Bush, each of whom would be excellent prospects in other years (especially Christie), would do well to hang up their running shoes and wait for 2024. Since FDR has either party held the White House for eight consecutive years? I could be wrong but I don't thing so. Hillary could do that. Not probably but definitely. If she wants to. Right until she opts out and throws her support elsewhere, I'll do every small thing in my small power to see that she runs and if there is a "draft Hillary fund" or if she starts raising money, she will definitely get a check from me and the amount of the check will be just a little more than I can really afford to give. If the day comes though that Hillary says no for good, even if it breaks my bank (and it will), I'm sending $2,000 to Elizabeth Warren. Hell. Hillary will get the same from me if she pulls the trigger. And I have never given that much to a candidate for political office. But for HRC or for Warren you bet I'd max out and it would be worth every penny.
I'm sure someone's answered this. I'm replying like three weeks after the post. But the answer is Mitt Romney. I think that before him, the answer is John McCain and before that, GHWB. It's also very common in the Republican party to let the "runner-up" or his running mate have another crack at it, which has brought us Presidents Nixon, Reagan, and Bush the elder. Democrats don't typically do this. You lose as a Democrat, you're pretty much out. Hillary would be an exception. Gore would have been an exception in 04 or 08. But neither Gore nor Romney (who's lost twice) gets another bite at the apple. Romney especially is finished and he will leave less of a mark as a candidate than Bob Dole or Michael Dukakis. Oh, EDIT: to go back to someone that was nominated at the top of the ticket, lost, and got the nomination again I guess that would be Nixon.
I expect someone has properly answered this too but which part of our country's socialism do you dislike? Is it Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid? Is it the fact that we have public schools or do you just hate highways? Don't tell me you want to abolish the fire departments and the cops! The entire New Deal was socialism. FDR was a total socialist by much stricter standards than get tossed around these days. And he was one of the greatest patriots and definitely one of the greatest presidents our nation has ever known. And, by the way, since you don't seem that bright, FDR also saved this country from the only economic collapse greater than the one that Obama inherited. Thank goodness the American people decided, decisively, to give Obama another term (FDR had four!) so he could complete the remarkable work he did over his first term -- a term I would add that, despite record obstructionism, resulted in more landmark accomplishments legislatively than any since LBJ. ACA, baby. Or since you prefer to give credit where it's due, "Obamacare." I like the sound of that even more than you do.
