More Proof That Higher Taxes on the Rich Will Not Raise Significant Revenues
By Capitalist in ChiefOn October 9, 2010, Harvard economics professor N. Gregory Mankiw wrote an article in the NY Times entitled “I Can Afford Higher Taxes. But They’ll Make Me Work Less.” In it, Mankiw describes how taxation is a considerable disincentive for him to take extra work upon himself (on top of his job as a professor) such as writing and speaking. And as you may know, tax revenues form work that’s not being done, amount to exactly zero dollars.
That article carries a prime example for one of the reasons why taxing the so called rich will never amount to a significant revenue boost to the government, let alone generate enough revenues for an expansive welfare state. And of course, there are many, many more reasons why taxing the “rich” does not work out as advertised.
Any politician (ahm Obama ahm) promising to expand the welfare state, while reducing the deficit, and doing it all at the expense of families making over $250,000 a year, should be laughed at, ridiculed, and driven out of town in shame for the fool that he is. Or rather, those who believe him should be laughed at, ridiculed, etc.
And in the mean time, while we’re discussing taxes on families earning $250,000 plus, this is the type of thing the truly wealthy (and liberal leaning) are doing with their money: The Tax Haven That’s Saving Google Billions
And yes, the U.S. Treasury’s share of money kept off shore because of high corporate taxation in the U.S. is exactly zero dollars.
5 Comments
June 16th, 2011 at 11:46 am
This is more of the same old argument that trickle down economics works.
It doesn’t work and never has. That’s how we got into this hole and why it has been getting deeper and deeper, while infrastructure crumbles and education deteriorates, ever since the man who proposed it (Reagan) convinced people that it would work 30 yrs ago. They have tried cutting taxes for the elites 20 times now and it has only got us further in the red. Wake up right now please!
Supply siders claim that cutting taxes, especially taxes on the rich and on corporations, will stimulate the economy. Why?
Because it’s encouraging to make $700,000 a day instead of just $500,000 a day so they will work much harder, with lower taxes.
Seriously. The top 25 hedge fund managers all made more than $1000,000 a day last year. Tax them a bit too much, and they get discouraged and goof off. I mean why bother to work hard for only $900,000 a day. That’s the appropriately named Laffer-curve theory. Named after a graduate student who cooked up this logic. To the delight of the rich. But IMO they will always work for as much profit as they can get. Just like the corporations did in the 50s,60s and 70s when large corporations actually paid taxes. They also paid a living wage then, and our economy boomed without any major recessions for over 40 yrs. Until the supply siders/corporate welfare queens infested the country.
Today with all the tax loopholes, I read that 94% of all corporations including foreign corporations making profits in this country, pay less than 5% income tax. One of the ways they do this is by tax loopholes that allow them to defer all taxes for profits they make by offshore susidiaries until those profits are brought back to this country. Which could be many years or never. They don’t go offshore because the taxes are too high here, but because they don’t exist at all offshore. Many Democrats since John Kennedy have tried to change the laws over the decades (including Obama) but the party of the corporate state,(Republican) and a few blue dogs on the take, always defeat it. So though the corporate tax rate is much higher, few of them actually pay any where near that. If you believe their whining, you are a sucker. When they don’t pay their share, we the middle class will have to pay for their deficit. So if you still think they are overtaxed, all you right wing suckers go ahead and send them your money to help them out. Just don’t make everyone else pay for your ignorance by voting for their corporate welfare party. They wouldn’t pay for all those tax lawyers if it wasn’t profitable. So even if Trickle down theory could work, which it hasn’t, (it has failed miserably over and over again), we have already used it so much that they pay almost nothing now, and further cuts even by large percentages would amount to almost nothing. But as I said, it has been tried 20 times now since they first fooled Reagan with this nonsense 30 yrs ago, And it alone has accounted for 12 trillion of our national debt as of 9/30/10. The average worker pays 30% income tax, and is responsible for 95% of all the consumption of the products and services that these companies sell here. It’s time we give the middle class a break and make the bigshots pay their fair share. The middle class runs the economy through their buying power. Not the greedy parasites who rob them of a living wage, their retirement funds and their homes. They destroy economies. And countries.
Everyone thinks that Reagan grew the economy with this nonsense. But the economy was snapping back from a long stagflation. Inflation, caused by Richard Nixon printing up huge amounts of money to give the economy a bump just before the 1973 elections, (this is when inflation first spiked, not during the Johnson admin) and later by the price of oil skyrocketing due to the OPEC oil embargo. Jimmy Carter’s Fed Chairman, Paul Volker broke the back of inflation by raising interest rates to double digits. Very unpopular and painful, but it had to be done and Carter sacrificed his presidency to do the right thing for America. Unlike Nixon or Ford who caused it and then let it takeoff. And the Republicans like to make everyone believe that he was our worst president. And unfortunately people believe this rhetoric. Like sheep following the Judas goats. And when inflation finally came down a couple years into Reagans 1st term and the economy snapped back, Reagan took all the credit. Then proceeded to raise the national debt by 1.6 trillion, busted union wages, which started the great decline of the middle class we see continuing today, and deregulated the Savings and Loans companies which led to their collapse that the taxpayers had to bail out to prevent another economic catastrophe but still caused the first major recession in the post WWII era. (when the Democrats ruled). And the continuation of deregulation has caused 2 more recessions now since then. But hey we can’t regulate them, it would hurt the economy!
This is off subject but some more of Reagan’s right wing stupidity was supporting oppressive dictatorships in Nicaragua, who impoverished the people , stole all there farmland and made virtual slaves of the people, but after many years of war were finally thrown out by revolutionaries, who adopted a new constitution, and elected a new legitimate Sandinista government as observed by delegations from the British and Irish parliaments, but Reagan denounced it as A Soviet Style farce. Imposed trade sanctions, and recruited, trained and armed the exiled dictatorship army/police and recruited international mercenaries to go back into Nicaragua and brutalize the young revolutionaries (Sandinistas) for the next 7 yrs. He called them the contras or freedom fighters, but the International Court of Justice called them terrorist. They attacked government services like rural clinics, schools, and food storage facilities, slaughtered teachers, doctors, nurses, technicians, and other professionals. 30,000 were killed. When congress found out about these illegal operations, they cut all of Reagan’s funding. He then proceeded to sell arms to Iran and used the funds to supply the Contra terrorist groups behind the backs of Congress and the American people. He then told everyone he couldn’t remember doing it! The Sandinistas fell and Nicaragua which was improving their quality of life, before Reagan, became the poorest country in the western hemisphere next to Haiti. No wonder they hate us so much.
Many think Reagan gets credit for the collapse of the Soviet Union, by spending billions of taxpayer dollars in an arms race. How ignorant. It was Mikhail Gorbachev and his attempt to restructure the Soviet political and economic system Through Perestroika and Glasnost.This exacerbated already big social, political, and economic problems and led to the final dissolution of the Soviet Union. Not the billions of taxpayers money Reagan wasted on bombs and missiles to be able to blow the world up 10 times over, which was really more corporate welfare for our military industrial complex. Reagan in my mind was the worst president in U.S. history and the beginning of our collapse. But the Judas goats are telling the sheep he was our best president. But I know why Reagan is the Idol of the Republican party. He was another clueless puppet of our now corporate state, just like Dumbya. Can’t wait to see who is next. Sarah Palin? Michelle Bachmann? How tragic and embarrassing for this country and its misinformed irresponsible electorate. As Thomas Jefferson said. “Only when people are well informed, can they be trusted with their own government”.
June 16th, 2011 at 11:55 am
Straw man argument. I suppose you’re entitled to your delusions. But why don’t you read the article and linked material to find out just one way out of many how higher taxes discourage profit taking and tax payment?
June 16th, 2011 at 12:22 pm
And it’s not even a trickle down argument. Trickle down is the notion that economic prosperity of the wealthy benefits the lesser rich. (A crazy theory I know. I mean who could possibly think that the billions Apple made from iPhone sales, for example, would benefit anyone but a few billionaires at the top, let alone tens of thousands of iPhone app developers and hundreds of millions of people who now have cheaper access to amazing technology.) This article is about tax revenues, not trickle down.
June 16th, 2011 at 12:25 pm
Yes, you’re so smart and well informed.
December 7th, 2011 at 9:24 pm
It seems to me we have to get rid of this “socialism” garbage and get a new (non-corrupt) government. can’t have a perfect socialistic society. The only way one could achieve a perfect society is if everyone was connected to the same brain. What I mean by this is that if everyone has their own personal plans someone might not want to work as much but they will receive financial aid from the government. Is this fair? On the other hand if someone is sick, they will receive free universal health care. At the same time if someone didn’t want to work in a capitalistic society they would be, for the most part thrown out into the street. I think every animal should be able to support themselves so I think I would suggest capitalism. Socialism just makes people depend on others, it makes people weak, and it makes them lazy; at the same time capitalism makes people have to work hard an builds character.
The idea of socialism is admirable, but if everyone depended on each other whats to stop people from not working such as the sly cat in the book Animal Farm who hid from work but happened to appear when all of the animals gathered for mealtime? Whats to stop people from doing that it is simple. Capitalism, capitalism will fix everything the mess hall would charge everyone individually and everyone would have their own individual salary based on how hard they had worked and what job position they had earned. In a socialistic society there could, if you will, be two men. Man number one, much like the horse in Animal Farm is an extremely hard worker. Man number one just works every day as hard he can, as long as he can, goes in extra hours, and overall is extremely dedicated to his job. Man number two, like Mollie the sheep that was never to be found during working hours is, on the contrary is a somewhat lackadaisical, spiritless, and, indifferent worker. Naturally man number one gets more done, thus he is favored by the boss and gets payed more than man number two, but wait! Man number one’s hard earned money is gone because he has to pay more taxes than man number two: the Lackadaisical, spiritless and, indifferent worker. The taxes he is paying are paying for man number two’s health care, retirement, social services, (babysitting for your children and free education etc.) and tax reductions. Sharing the wealth is ridiculous and childish.