Comments on: Wealth Redistribution? Wealthy Americans Are Taxed Less Now Than When Reagan Was President

By: 9 Things The Rich Don't Want You To Know About Taxes

9 Things The Rich Don't Want You To Know About Taxes — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 17:20:16 +0000

[...] well over 30 years! Originally Posted by apdst Like what?………….. Like this… Wealth Redistribution? Wealthy Americans Are Taxed Less Now Than When Reagan Was President People often talk about how our country is attempting to redistribute wealth, but people seem [...]

By: The Protectionism Watch and Rebuilding the Middle Class | Blog | Wealth Redistribution? Wealthy Americans Are Taxed Less Now Than When Reagan Was President | Progress In Action

Sat, 27 Nov 2010 16:39:31 +0000

[...] Wealth Redistribution? Wealthy Americans Are Taxed Less Now Than When Reagan Was President | Progres…. [...]

By: More Taxes Does Not Destroy Jobs - Maybe The Opposite

More Taxes Does Not Destroy Jobs - Maybe The Opposite — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:49:52 +0000

[...] than any other tax group. If you want the money to be spent, give it to the poorest people. Also, the lowest tax rate during the last 90 years was 24% in 1929, the year the Great Depression began. Did not seem to help out much. In 1932 it was brought up to 63%, a far cry higher than our current [...]

By: These people are our future - Page 8 - Poker Forums

These people are our future - Page 8 - Poker Forums — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 20:28:58 +0000

[...] classes, a small minority of large capitalists, and a large proletarian majority are formed." Wealth Redistribution? Wealthy Americans Are Taxed Less Now Than When Reagan Was President | Progres… [...]

By: stockinbug

stockinbug — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 00:05:30 +0000

@paul

Paul says:
>”It only shows that they are equal, and nothing else.”

Exactly. I posted the graph to disprove Chuck’s goofy assertion that socialist northern Europe has a much lower standard of living than the US does. Nobody here claimed they have it better than us (aside from the fact they are happier).

Paul says:
>Obviously, ideologically, you would say they are better because they pander to more leftist thought.

Where do I say that? Do you like putting words in people’s mouths? Again, I was disproving Chuck’s assertion that socialism = failure. Not wishing to believe blatant lies does not make me an automatic leftist or socialist.

Or, perhaps my willingness to believe the kinds of lies promulgated by Chuck would make me an automatic capitalist or conservative?

You know what my real position is? Look at my first post on this board. All ideology is rubbish. Labels are nonsense. the most successful societies on earth use a healthy mixture of things that work, no matter what ideology they come from.

By: Joshua Simeon Narins

Joshua Simeon Narins — Sat, 24 Apr 2010 20:26:44 +0000

Ack! I meant four major DEPRESSIONS, not recessions.

By: Joshua Simeon Narins

Joshua Simeon Narins — Sat, 24 Apr 2010 20:26:23 +0000

@Rick

The Holland Tulip bubble was the reslut of government regulation? I can only hope you are as ugly as you are ignorant, otherwise you might someday breed, and that would, from what you just typed, be a shame.

There were four major recessions in the 70 years before the New Deal, none since.

By: Paul

Paul — Sat, 24 Apr 2010 20:20:20 +0000

@Stockinbug: All the first graphic shows is that Europe is, for the most part, dark green, the same dark green that the U.S. and Canada are ranked. There are some parts of Europe that are ranked lower than this. So no, the graph does not clearly show that Northern Europe is equal or better than the U.S. It only shows that they are equal, and nothing else. Obviously, ideologically, you would say they are better because they pander to more leftist thought. I would say the opposite. I agree with your earlier statement that “happiness” is the most important thing in one’s life. That is an absolute and anyone who disagrees with this is an idiot or a liar. Of course, I don’t believe countries that violate your rights and liberty (European socialism) will ever make an economic conservative happy (though leftists may be deluded into thinking that they are).

Nicely put Rick.

By: Rick

Rick — Sat, 24 Apr 2010 19:52:59 +0000

Pchalks:

“Look where it got us. Right to the door of this recession! This is the second time, in fact. It happened in 1929.”

The Federal Reserve was put in in 1913 to protect the economy from recessions and depressions and from the ravages of inflation. How’s that working out? I won’t begin to count the recessions and depressions, but the dollar is now worth 95% less. How’s that working out?

Economic corrections are quick (painful of course) in a free market economy, as excesses are quickly worked out as capital reallocates to its best uses. Government suppression of the free market allows massive misallocations and bubbles and reflation, and long, drawn out down period and recoveries. The economy is a beautiful, self-correcting mechanism, when it is allowed to operate unimpeded.

By: Michelle

Michelle — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 02:33:44 +0000

Chuck, there were 4 depressions in the 70 years ending with the 1930s, there have been zero depressions since. Some of these depressions, like the Long Depression and the Great Depression, occurred while we were on the gold standard or gold-and-silver standard. You didn’t actually say you wanted a metal standard, but that’s what most Fed-bashers do.