
Anyone who hasn’t spent the last couple of years on Mars knows how bad a situation our economy is in. And there has been no shortage of discussions about how we got here. Most of the talk is about the financial institutions and how they were regulated. Republicans of course are again calling for lower taxes as a way to correct the problems with the economy. “Lower taxes will increase investment which will help create more jobs.” But if you look at the history of income tax rates in the United States and their effect on the economy, you find that the Republicans could not be more wrong.
On the Tax Foundation web site they have a page that charts the history of income tax rates in the United States from 1913 to the present. In 1913 the top income tax rate was a tiny 7% for incomes over a half million. Then in 1916 the rate structure was changed making the maximum rate 15% for incomes over 2 million. And in 1917 the maximum rate was raised to 67% for incomes over 2 million. Then in 1918 they were raised to 77%. Taxes remained at this level until 1922 resulting in the Roaring Twenties. But the good times were short lived.
In 1922 the maximum rate was lowered to 58% and by 1925 they had been dropped to just 25% and remained there until 1932 when they were raised to 63%. But by 1929 the Roaring Twenties had come to a crashing halt. The problem was that the lower tax rates allowed too much money to accumulate at the top causing a bottle neck in the economy. The result is known as the Great Depression. It took 16 years and a world war before we crawled out of that hole. By then the maximum rates were around 90%.
It was the late 1940’s and the 90% rate had been around 2 or 3 years. And not only had our economy recovered, but it was on the verge of an era that saw middle incomes soar and a standard of living unprecedented in human history. The early 1960’s saw maximum rates lowered to around 70% but by 1970 even my parents, a union truck driver and a nurses aid earned a very comfortable living and they had 7 kids. To give it perspective… In 1970 my folks brought home about $1,500 a month and our house payment was $70 a month. Today my wife and I take in about $3,000 a month and our house payment is $850 a month. My folks paid 4% of their income for housing whereas my wife and I, 39 years later are paying 28% of our income. That’s how diminished the middle class has become.
In 1982 under Reagan the maximum rate was dropped to 50% and in 1987 it was lowered to 39% and then to 28%. Today the maximum rate is 35%. But 5 decades of sustained high income tax rates for the wealthy had created the largest and most robust economy the world had ever seen. So it should be no surprise that it took 30 years for low tax rates on the wealthy to bring it down. And that is exactly what low tax rates on the wealthy has done.
Now I know there are a lot of factors relating to how our economy behaves. And there is no denying that within the decades long trends I speak of there have been many ups and downs in the economy. But these are minor compared to the overall effects of taxation over the last century.
Higher tax rates on the wealthy between 1913 and 1922 resulted in good economic times for middle class Americans. But just as those good times were underway tax cut fever hit D.C. and they were lowered in 1922. The negative effect was so profound it caused the stock market to crash in 1929 followed by the Great Depression of the 1930‘s. I suppose the memory of the pain of those days is responsible, but it took nearly 50 years for America to forget that lesson because high tax rates for the wealthy lasted that long. And that half century of high tax rates for the wealthy also saw the largest expansion of middle class incomes and the single biggest leap forward in the standard of living for common folk in the history of humanity.
But we did forget the lesson and allowed the Republicans to lower taxes on the wealthy in the 1980’s and look at what it got us. And considering it took 30 years for tax cut fever to undo what 50 years of responsible taxation had created, I’m terrified at the prospect of how long it may take to undo the undoing. Especially considering how hesitant the folks in D.C. seem to be about raising taxes on the wealthy.
The best economic times the working class of this country ever saw was when the maximum tax rate was 90%. And now the Republicans would have us believe that if we raise the rate from 35% to 36% it would mean economic Armageddon? Puhlease!!!
The bottom line here folks is that tax rates on the wealthy are too low and anyone who thinks we will ever see a real recovery without raising those taxes is fooling themselves. Ain’t gonna happen.
*************
Devin Barber, Politics Correspondent
Devin’s column, “Left Of The Right” published weekly or more to Gather Essentials: Politics is a Blue Collar Democrats take on current political news.
Devin was raised by proud Roosevelt Democrats. Being the son of parents counted among the throng of Americans displaced by the Great Depression has given Devin a deep rooted passion for causes dealing with the poor and the working class.
You can find all of Devin’s columns at LEFT OF THE RIGHT
You can keep up with Devin’s postings and his Gather activity by joining his Gather network. Just click here: Devin Barber and then select the orange “Connect” button on the left-hand side of the page.
You can find Devin and other Political Correspondents, plus celebrity content and plenty of other politics experts at Politics.gather.com.


Comments: 117
In the '40's the War NOT tax increases rebounded the economy.
Increasing taxes lowers spending on other goods. Your parents did not have cell phones, cable tv, internet, computers, and many othere luxury items we have today. Now you may say that people don't "NEED" those things, but they are available and in some case make life more efficient and safer.
Davin I have always considered you to be more rational and balanced. But this one is just outside the realm of reality.
So -- would you be willing to take a pay cut on your boss' assurance that you'll actually end up with more money? I didn't think so.
The only "revenue" that increased is the hording of personal wealth.
"Spartan just walking away, shaking his head and softly chuckling to himself"
You're right about this Poli. It was primarily the war that got us out of the Great Depression. FDR kept the economy from going all the way down the toilet. He also did much to keep the spirit of middle (then lower) class Americans alive.
Let's look at what happened in WWII. The government raised taxes and SPENT MONEY LIKE CRAZY and we came out of the depression. After the war, marginal tax rates on the rich remained at up to 91% and the economy boomed with the middle class expanding at an enourmous rate. The WWII vets got federal grants and loans for education and housing. Eisenhower started the Interstate Highway system, another big government project that not only created a lot of jobs but helped increase the nation's security and improved commerce.
http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/wm327.cfm
:O\
Taxes are just one potential means of getting money back into the hands of the poor. But less taxes for the rich does guarantee that there will be less money for the poor.
Compare what the rich do with their additional money with what the government does with their money.
Of course the best system has no taxes at all for anyone at any time.
www.nopom.info
http://www.american.com/archive/2007/november-december-magazine-contents/guess-who-really-pays-the-taxes
The problem is spending; inefficient spending targeting in a political fashion to buy votes, gain favors,pay of supporters etc. Just look at the 'stimulus' pork-off.
:O\
sad, but true.
I'm gonna have to defend Winston on this one. Here's why. In a business you have your different levels of responsibility, with the executives on the top making the most money, while the worker is on the lowest level, thus making the least money. That's why there is a constant struggle with cost and productivity. The executive are the ones who do the least ''work'' but are taxed at a lower rate, and the ones that actually ''do'' the work are taxed at a higher rate. The worker, seeing the executive drive a new car and getting the big bonuses, while they get a turkey at Thanksgiving, starts saying, ''why am I working so hard and this idiot is getting all the money''. It does kinda make people ''not'' want to work as hard.
''If you tax work, you get less work.''
http://www.gather.com/viewImage.action?fileId=3096224745979501
Why not spend more time earning your own money instead of stealing for others?
That would mean I am making more money.
Will the fool who won the lottery refuse his winnings because of the taxes???
Again, I'll defend James here. I too, think it's time the wealthy of this country stop stealing off the backs of the people that actually make America ''work''. I too think they should start earning the obscene amounts of money they are being paid. And if they can't, give it to the people that ''can'' earn it. The workers will always worker harder when given a positive incentive. That is what you were talking about, right James???
Couldn't have said better myself. The reality was that no one actually paid 90% of their income in taxes because of loopholes and the incentive to reinvest as you stated.
Socialism becomes communism with you looking into the barrel of a gun.
realistic
Democratic party members like progressive taxes, and pass regressive taxes, so they are wrong only once.
Dems love to trot out the high tax rates of the post War days but forget why the effect was less detrimental (and it did drive capital and businesses overseas giving foreign firms both financing and lowering US competition) then would have been normal. Until the early 60s, many foreign lands had been trying to rebuild destroyed industries, homes, decimated populations, or were behind the Iron Curtain and non competitive at all. Once they were able to concentrate on actual improvement rather than rebuilding their base, they were able to rocket upwards using those same US assets fleeing taxes at home.
Capital and know how are in demand in this world. The US is no longer a haven for investors or savers with one of the most complex tax systems in the First World and the second highest corporate tax rate in the entire world. That's why American money and know how is leaving or spending more time hiding then working. Obama got it right when he said "no business wants to invest in a place where the government skims 20% off the top"(Ghana, 11 July 2009)...he was referring to corruption but ironically the same applies to the high US tax rates
So I guess it comes down to who you think should be in control of this country. The monetary gluttons who have driven our economy into the ground in a vain attempt to achieve the title of richest SOB in the world, or the rest of us. You know... the 99% who actually DO the work of building and maintaining our civilization.
The teabaggers took the extra cash to fund their protest against higher taxes, how seriously insane is that?????
:O\
I highly recommend everyone read the entire site. It gives a very thorough overview of why the current tax policies proposed by the President and many Democrats, including Cap-and-trade, repeal of the Bush Tax cuts and the inheritance taxes will destroy any potential growth of our economy for the next several decades.
I used their data because it was presented in the easiest format for my purpose and was checked for accuracy several times. For them to call any conclusions that don't align with theirs "incorrect" is disengenuous though. And in light of the "facts" I've presented for anyone to say with a straight face that raising taxes will destroy the economy is plain psycho talk. I've shown quite clearly that periods of high taxation are always followed by periods of economic prosperity and that low taxation is always followed by a serious downturn in the economy. You simply cannot deny the facts.
Taxes were raised from 1916 to 1922. That was followed by the Roaring 20's. Taxes were lowered from 1922 to 1932. That was followed by the Great Deppression. Taxes were raised and kept high between 1932 and 1982. This saw the recovery from the Great Depression and the longest sustained period of economic prosperity in our nations history. Taxes were lowered in 1982 and by 1990 the economy was down. In 1992 they were raised slightly causing the economy to improve, But in 2002 they were again lowered and now the economy is in the toilet.
This sin't speculation, this is FACT. Now, where is the evidence where huge tax cuts resulted in a sustained improvement of the economy?
You're really a masochist aren't you?
First let's get rid of the strawman argument you keep throwing up. The key has always been fair distribution of the of a low enough tax burden among all levels of society to make investment in growth possible. Taxing the rich is fine, but disproportionately taxing them as punishment by anti-capitalist leads directly to losses amongst all levels of the middle class as well. (Very nicely explained in a great video on the Tax Foundation website. Check it out)
Now, lets just examine one actual example from history. You've specifically made a point of mentioning the Roaring Twenties, but you're attempt at the rewrite of history doesn't wash with anyone with even a minimum of understanding of history. The documentation is crystal clear on this. For example, you specifically left out that during the entire time taxes were going up during the 'teens the economy was in an increasing spiral down into depression. They 20s only started roaring in 1921 several months AFTER Warren Harding took office and lowered taxes. While lower taxes were only one factor in the totality of the elements that created the subsequent boom, the timing cannot be argued. Taxes went down, people began investing, the economy took off once again. At Harding's death in 1924 Coolidge took over. What was one of Coolidges main areas of focus? You guessed it, lowering taxes even more. What was the result? The roaring twenties roared even louder. Then Hoover comes along, stock market crashes and what did his administration do? One of the largest tax increases in US history during a depression. Result: That depression continued for another 14 years, only ending when WW2 caused a boom in manufacturing. It's a direct one-to-one correlation.
And thats just one example. I can make at least 3 more directly from the website you linked to originally. Save yourself the heartache next time and try reading the source material you're quoting.
But the thing that completely blows your argument out of the water is the fact that between 1932 and the early 1960's the upper tax rate hovered around 90% and then around 70% until 1982 and saw the biggest rise in middle incomes, the biggest leap forward in the average persons standard of living in human history and the longest sustained period of economic growth in our nations history. After taxes were lowered to below 50% in 1982 we began to see the decline of the middle class and now 27 years later our economy is in the toilet.
So, a 90% upper tax rate existed throughout the single largest economic expansion of any nation in the history of this planet and you still argue it just isn't so? I think you need a C.A.T. scan my friend...
And if you do make more than that then you need to realize that the only reason you are able to earn that kind of money is because of the oppotunity this country provides.
And your argument that lower taxes encourages more investment is simply misinformed. But to be honest, in theory you may be correct. One could assume that lower taxes would result in more investment. But the reality is that when the wealthy are taxed less they don't invest, they just keep the cash. No, the highest levels of investment this country has seen was back when we had a 90% tax rate. But the reality was that few if any ever actually paid 90%. Smart business people realized it was better to re-invest their profits and keep their personal incomes below the 90% bracket. That's the reality of it.
"Where are people reading or hearing the less money in = more revenue? I cannot believe anyone who thinks like this is human."
You never read that... you made that up. See, what you read from conservatives is that LESS TAX RATE (rate is a percentage) = more revenue.
How is that possible? Well, if you are able to grow your business, or your paycheck is larger because the company you work for is doing better, then even with a lower tax rate, the government can increase revenues. It happened under Bush. He lowered tax rates and increased revenues.
If you are still confused, please take a few remedial math courses.
If you tax me at 30% and I make $150k... the government gets $45k.
Isn't that amazing?
The ultimate effect of Reagan's tax cuts has been catastrophic for our economy. If it weren't for the safety nets of Social Security, Welfare, and unemployment benefits along with immediate "government" intervention the current economic crisis would have made the great Depression look like nothing.
The problem with folks like Don and apparently the rest of the Republican Party is that they obtusely refuse to accept that their economic ideology failed miserably. The American people know this. That's why the GOP lost so badly in 2008. And until they can get that through their heads, they will remain in the political wilderness.
$100k @ 40% =$40 to compare $100k @ 30% =30k obviously lower tax % = less to the Government.
I am glad not to have been in the same statistics class as Don, our curve would have been so low that no one would have learned much.
the rich pay a federal tax rate of about 25% after deductions. poor, poor rich people. they need to pull up those straps.
Considering all of this, I'm quite confident that our CEO is overpaid. However on the other hand, I consider myself to be fortunate to have a decent paying job in this economy.
But you know what....screw it all. By all means we should divide our CEO's salary as well as what I have worked hard for all of my life with the worthless bum who has done nothing whatsoever to improve his own well being.
Welcome to the United Socialist States of America. Change We Can Believe In? You've gotta love it!
By your rhetoric however it's obvious you have no idea what the reality is. You and many like you are simply along for the "I hate taxes" and "I hate the gummint" band wagon. And that is truly sad Tim, because that ride is nothing but a hay ride for fools and idiots. "WE THE PEOPLE" are the government Tim. And like the graphic from my article says... taxes are the price we pay for civilization.
those bums would be the bankers.
where did you get your education from?
Right now there is no difference between the Dems and the Republicans parties, they are equally as bad, and over spend without regulation, so no taxation can help. Idiots keep supporting one side or the other, and then complain about the mess we have. The fact is newither side has shown any care for the people nor the Country, and the Democrats just want to make a whole new Country that no one can afford. The Republicans want to pocket as much money as they can, and do as little as they can.
It has nothing to do with the taxes, only a moron would think it does.