The revised value of American citizens...down.

http://www.crimefilenews.com/2013/07/american-citizenship-is-rapidly.html


Productivity and excellence was rewarded and accordingly America became the wealthiest and strongest nation on earth. Today productivity is punished with extortionate taxation at every level of government.
Nearly 100 years passed and Socialists and Communists floated new ideas about government. These ideas failed in nation after nation but for a few party leaders that could live like royalty through corruption while their citizens were starved, confined and enslaved. These governments are well known for killing dissidents or anyone wishing to escape from their own homelands.
That did not stop the spread of Socialism and Communism to the USA and our government including the Whitehouse. Both major political parties are awash with politicians on a united mission, to force the failed Socialist ideas on Americans. These disloyal politicians all believe the Constitution they were sworn to protect is outdated and irrelevant.
Socialism can only flourish when the vast majority of citizens are totally dependent upon government. We are at a point where over 50% of the population is impoverished and programed into utter and complete dependence.
Our Socialists are doing everything they can to increase the population with the ignorant and poor from Mexico and Central America. The price of admission is simply to break our immigration laws. Millions more illiterate and unskilled trespassers are being handed citizenship and the right to vote by our Socialist politicians. That will guarantee a Socialist government in the USA for the next 100 years.

Today productivity is punished with extortionate taxation at every level of government.

BS.......try the taxation of the booming fifties and sixties.......double the rates we have now......I read one sentence of the BS, and your swill of Corporatist dogma is easily taken in by checker players, but this nation boomed with much higher tax rates paying down much higher debt, because after World War II the guys that put their lives on the line for this country had little patience for the shills who tried to sell the corporatist BS you so easily take in......Start playing chess the game of the Oligarchy.....they have folks playing checkers and explaining reality......wonderful.

That did not stop the spread of Socialism and Communism to the USA and our government including the Whitehouse.

Now we have gone from checkers to Candyland.

The federal corporate income tax differs from the individual income tax in two major ways. First, it is a tax not on gross income but on net income, or profits, with permissible deductions for most costs of doing business. Second, it applies only to businesses that are chartered as corporations—not to partnerships or sole proprietorships. The federal tax is levied at different rates on different brackets of income: 15 percent on taxable income under $50,000, 25 percent on income between $50,000 and $75,000, and rates ranging from 34 to 39 percent on income above that. The lower-bracket rates benefit small corporations. Of the 4.8 million corporate tax returns filed in 1998, more than 90 percent were from corporations with assets of less than $1 million. The lower rates, however, had little economic significance. More than 91 percent of all corporate tax revenue came from the 1.5 percent of corporations with assets greater than $10 million.

States levy further income taxes on corporations, at rates generally ranging from 3 to 12 percent. Because states typically permit deductions for federal taxes paid, net rates range from 1.9 to 4.9 percent. Some localities tax corporations as well. One main reason that state and local corporate income taxes remain low is that corporations can easily relocate out of states that impose unusually high taxes.

]How the corporate income tax arose and how it has survived over the decades is a case study of the perniciousness of bad ideas, of why tax systems are often so much worse than they need be, and of how little influence the economics profession has over government policy. Except for emergency taxes in wartime, corporate profits were first taxed in 1909, when Congress enacted a 1 percent tax on corporation income. The rate rose to 12.5 percent a decade later, and progressive rates—that is, rates that increase with income—were added in 1932. Surtaxes on corporate income were added for “excess profits” and “war profits” during both world wars. The highest peacetime rate, 52.8 percent, was reached in the 1960s.

The second major flaw in the corporate income tax is that it misallocates capital by favoring the issuance of debt over equity because interest payments are tax deductible, while dividend payments are not. This favors investments in assets more readily financed by debt, such as buildings and structures (which can be used for many purposes, and thus are more easily used as collateral for loans) over investments more logically financed by stock, such as specialized equipment or research and development. In addition, the deductibility of interest payments favors established companies over start-ups because the former can more easily issue debt securities. Some economists, focusing on this last phenomenon, have argued that this feature makes the corporate income tax a tax on entrepreneurship. During the 1980s, U.S. corporations issued huge amounts of new debt. Corporate bonds outstanding increased from less than $500 billion in 1980 to $1.4 trillion in 1988. At the same time, many corporations reduced their outstanding equity by buying back their own shares.

2seaoat wrote:Today productivity is punished with extortionate taxation at every level of government.

BS.......try the taxation of the booming fifties and sixties.......double the rates we have now......I read one sentence of the BS, and your swill of Corporatist dogma is easily taken in by checker players, but this nation boomed with much higher tax rates paying down much higher debt, because after World War II the guys that put their lives on the line for this country had little patience for the shills who tried to sell the corporatist BS you so easily take in......Start playing chess the game of the Oligarchy.....they have folks playing checkers and explaining reality......wonderful.

You have a bit of a foggy memory about the Eisenhower Days. Either that or you have gotten your talking points from the DailyKOS who left out a few..."minor" details.

What you left out is that, at the time, anyone earning $16,682.00 per year or less paid income tax at the rate of 20%. Adjusted for inflation, that would be $133,743.00 per year. That translates to everyone earning LESS THAN $133,743 PER YEAR WOULD PAY 20% INCOME TAX. Gosh, that sure would eliminate that 48% that pay no income tax today! Way to go!

As for the top rate of your beloved 92%, that was paid by those earning over $2,500,000.00 Adjusted for inflation, that would be $20,043,158.00 today. Do you really want to tell us that 1% of the nation earns of TWENTY MILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR? Really?

In the same year, employees paid 2% for Social Security and the employer paid nothing. Not quite the 15.2% of today.

Now, do you really want to go back to those rates? Are you aware of the long, long list of deductions then?

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/taxRates.html

http://www.westegg.com/inflation/

You have a bit of a foggy memory about the Eisenhower Days.

You then post stats which back exactly what I was saying. Brilliant.

2seaoat wrote:You have a bit of a foggy memory about the Eisenhower Days.

You then post stats which back exactly what I was saying.  Brilliant.

If you want to believe my facts are what you said...you certainly are playing with a short deck.

So you agree that anyone making less than $130,000. per year should pay a 20% income tax?  PLUS 15.3% for SS and Medicare. Or do we go back to the 2% SS tax collected only from the worker at the time?

How many folks do you think you'd be collecting 92% income tax from since that would be from people whose net earnings were over $20 MILLION per year?  Of course that is LESS all the deductions available back then which we do not have today.