Obama about to expire tax cuts for the "rich"

I'm all for a consumption tax.

I think a consumption tax would be good. I think it should incorporate some of the basic progressive principles inherent in the current income tax system.

But I don't think a loaf of bread should be taxed at the same rate as a new Mercedes.

IMHO

http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/IncDistJune00.pdf

notadmin, i could only find information from the 2000 census. it's kind of surprising. look at the table on page 4.

No no no. Hear me out. Id like to propose an intelligence tax. The smarter you are the less you pay. So like a-rod can maKe $250mm, but would have to pay $249mm in taxes. It'd be like a national exam. Oh while i'm at it high scorer get 2 votes in the general elction. :)

Traders would get 99% taken away, Some hookers may keep 99%, this will force ppl to marrry based on 'brains'. ;) this is for last nite. Hehe

notadm: I do recall last year hearing that 10,000 people paid over 90% of the taxes in NYC.

again, dated info. i'm looking forward to the census results.

http://www.comptroller.nyc.gov/bureaus/bud/personalincome.shtm

are these complaints serious? if your household is in the top 5% of income, guess what? you're rich. if you are in the top 1%, you're very rich. instead of complaining about paying a reasonable tax rate, why not express gratitude to this society which has enabled you to thrive? my tax bill goes up each year--a lot--because i make more money each year. and i'm always happy to pay that big bill, since it is a measure of how well i am doing.

"Id like to propose an intelligence tax"
---------------------------------------

omg, w67, i proposed the opposite thing to family members and looked at me in total disgust. after their rant on "work ethics" and "effort"... i actually thought the opposite of your proposal could work. i never had to put much effort till i was in college, while my friends were studying like crazy without good results. how fair is that? if i have to make less effort to get the same result, why not taxing me more if it's the "effort" what people values?

your tax will maximizing the long term human IQ, and also gives incentives for people to make an effort towards appear smart. mine will make us all a bunch of idiots... we are close to that i feel sometimes.

the lip service paid to "work as hard as you can" exasperates me when it comes from people that don't work at all. besides, if they value it so much, how can they support taxes on labor? why don't they try to change the tax system towards taxing property, inheritances and discretionary income? it's cause they make their own living through those... ? if effort is really valued, then tax "easy living" like there's no tomorrow.

thanks AR and p09!

according to that table 4, in 1997, 40% of tax revenue was coming from 4% of the households... highly dependent on this guys. guess they are not that mobile after all, they might be new yorkers at heart to stay in a high tax area.

according to your last link, in 1997:
* 57.1 percent was incurred by the 5.5 percent of filers with NY State adjusted gross income (AGI) of $100,000 or more.
* Manhattan residents filed one-fourth of the PIT returns and owed more than half the PIT.
* Nonresidents earned an average 1996 income twice that of residents. Nonresidents were paid 37 percent of NYC worker earnings, but owed only 7 percent of PIT; in 2000, nonresidents will pay zero PIT (end of commuter's tax). Most (74 percent of) nonresident NYC workers live in New Jersey, Long Island, and Westchester.

i was surprised the most by the last point. if more families stay in the city, % earnings from nonresidents should be decreasing.

Wah wah I am rich and I dont want to pay my fair share of taxes......for the country that supplies me the only economy, currency and infrastructure where I can make that kind of money .... and the more I have the less percentage I actually pay.... but I am going to whine that I don't want to pay my taxes that support our financial system, military, fire departments, etc etc

Wahh Waahhh Waaah

Steve Forbes is right we need a flat tax.

The decision to tax the wealthy strikes me as populist, since the majority falls below the threshold.

There's also a dichotomy between those that feel entitled to things based on NEED(entitlement) vs those that want it based on GREED(they earned it). And gov't steps in with it's moral judgment and effects to mediate a transfer.

It's not about not wanting to pay fair shair, it's a question fo what is *FAIR SHARE*

http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/Taxpayermigration1209.pdf
AR, did you see this report? the city keeps on bleeding higher income residents and welcoming lower income ones (and a lower number too). a loss in number and in incomes. the outtend to relocate in NYS(out of NYC), NJ, FL, CA and PA.

lol petrfitz, it's just that taxes for wage earners (specially for the young, for which FICA adds 15% towards future 0 benefits imho) are getting closer to european levels but without many of the services in return. while inheritances and assets/property accumulations get barely taxed. so in that sense it's interesting to me the dichotomy between what society says it values (meritocracy) and what the tax code values.

tax policy matters in the long run, labor is the biggest asset for many (it's not their house actually). hey, it's interesting to see how reliant nyc is on a few wealthy and hedge fund managers (although this data only includes personal income tax, it doesn't include sales tax nor property taxes). what would the city look like if this group doesn't do well... say, 5 years in a row?

page 8
http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/understandingthebudget.pdf

Personal Income Tax is only 10% of total revenue for the city!!! hence,... not so catastrophic if "group doesn't do well... say, 5 years in a row? "!!!

State and Fed aid 30% (how this aid amount varies is the key more than how well do the hedge funds do)
Property Tax 27%
Personal Income Tax is only 10%
Other Non-Tax Revenues 10%
General Sales Tax 7%
Business Income Taxes 7%
Other Taxes 7%
Real Estate-related Taxes 2%

Steve Forbes looks like a pedifile and was born into his success.

Riversider what do you think is fair for a country that allows you to be educated, have the career you have, protect you from terrorists, supports the currency that your entire life savings is in, educates you and your children, puts out a fire if your house burns, supplys police to protect you, roads to drive on, water to drink, etc?

Notadmin - you can thank the republicans for the fact that our country doesnt have the services that Europe does. We pay 2-3 times as much for our healthcare than Europeans they get better healthcare and live longer than we do.

As far as the "weathly hedge funders and the wall street wealthy" they made their money as parasites raping and pillaging the life savings and tax dollars of American citizens. Why should we allow them to keep doing this? F them. Regulate them. Make them be honest.

Just because they were successful stealing money in the past doesnt mean we should continue to let them and doesnt mean that our economy is reliant upon them.

a couple of weeks ago somebody posted that info, that net migration in the city had resulted in declining income levels. so we've had hugely increased fixed costs, reduced income levels, declining asset wealth, high unemployment, will have higher taxes, enormous decline in rental prices, large supply of new housing units, restricted credit environment (particularly for jumbos).

i think it's time to buy.

http://www.wnyc.org/topics/nyc

Bloomberg: State Cuts Would Force City Layoffs
January 25, 2010

Mayor Bloomberg goes to Albany today to urge lawmakers to restore proposed cuts in state aid to the city's budget.

the state portion of (State and Fed aid 30%) is 19%, HUGE!
albany has nyc by the b*lls. i originally thought nyc depended more on the success of hedge fund's and wealthy.

protect you from terrorists
I'm not feeling very good right now on that one. Miranda should only be for U.S. Citizens. And the Fed has not been doing a particularly good job having contributed to much of the Credit Crisis.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31969.html

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) is joining Republicans in ripping the FBI for reading Miranda rights to the would-be airline bomber, saying the administration made a mistake and should transfer Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab to military custody.

"i think it's time to buy."....a gun!

petrfitz, i agree with you.

i wonder whether there's a total tax burden threshold under which people either go off books or withheld labor (enjoy subsidized leisure). it will be different for each demographic and it'll depend on whether working less gets them more benefits. just a thought.

p09, or drugs. maybe both.

Yeah Riversider our country should disregard the constitution and all the legal principles that our country was built upon because you are scared of some boogie man terrorist.

How will we be able to protect ourselves from terrorists if people like you dont want to pay your taxes?

You want all the privileges this country provides but you dont want to pay for them.

And Liberman is the biggest tool there is. He is an idiot and makes sense that he is siding with the other idiots who didnt protect us on their watch and got us into this awful mess.

a couple of weeks ago somebody posted that info, that net migration in the city had resulted in declining income levels. so we've had hugely increased fixed costs, reduced income levels, declining asset wealth, high unemployment, will have higher taxes, enormous decline in rental prices, large supply of new housing units, restricted credit environment (particularly for jumbos).

i think it's time to buy.
---------------------

yep, guns & ammo would say the survivalist.

Where in America are these high income earners going to move to? No one can answer that question. They will stay in NY or the NY area because this is the only place in the US where they can earn the money they do and live the lifestyles they do.

How will we be able to protect ourselves from terrorists if people like you dont want to pay your taxes?
You want all the privileges this country provides but you dont want to pay for them.
-----------------------

this reminds me of cheney's scare tactics. you win terrorists with better intelligence, not with widespread bombing and invasions that only make it easier for them to recruit youngsters.

about what the country provides, in reality, the gap in terms of living standards with other countries (not only europe, but even with emerging mkt cities) is closing. so greener pastures will be more enticing. labor is not an asset you can take for granted in terms of tax policy, it moves.

petrfitz, we're talking about something that has already happened. not that will happen going forward. more high income earners have been leaving the city than have been moving to the city.

"No no no. Hear me out. Id like to propose an intelligence tax. The smarter you are the less you pay."

Why would you want such a tax w67? You would end up paying more than you made!

AboutReady - then where did all these titans of industry go? Please answer me. If all these super contributers and wealth earners left, where did they go?

notadmin - where will the workforce go? Detroit? Idaho? Miami? huh? they wont go, they will stay in the NY area or they will leave and take on other careers that wont pay anything close to what they make here.

AboutReady - then where did all these titans of industry go? Please answer me. If all these super contributers and wealth earners left, where did they go?

notadmin - where will the workforce go? Detroit? Idaho? Miami? huh? they wont go, they will stay in the NY area or they will leave and take on other careers that wont pay anything close to what they make here.

petrfitz, here's the report, includes data ONLY till 2007. very interesting to see whether how the pattern changed with the recession from 2008 on. at the very least i'd expect poorer immigrants to stop coming in great numbers, as they know that the jobs are not there.

http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/Taxpayermigration1209.pdf

"notadmin - where will the workforce go? Detroit? Idaho? Miami? huh? they wont go, they will stay in the NY area or they will leave and take on other careers that wont pay anything close to what they make here"

true, the cheaper the area, the lower wage incomes tend to be. check out the report, at least graphs and tables, they include main locations that export/import people to and from nyc. it's well done.

it does refute the "everybody wants to stay in manhattan/nyc" cliche. maybe, the bleeding is not as pronounced, but it's still there.

it would be great if the data would be split by demographics. for ex, FL imho is still receiving mostly non-working elderly while PA imho is receiving housing bubble-priced out youngsters.

the report shows that te highest destination of migrants out is Florida. 1 - that says "retirement", 2 - who the F would ever want to live in that ratwhole? 3 - how many power brokers changing the economy and industry do you hear about coming out of Jacksonville?

"No no no. Hear me out. Id like to propose an intelligence tax. The smarter you are the less you pay."

Why would you want such a tax w67? You would end up paying more than you made!

why not a height tax? Peole who are taller tend to earn more
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/magazine/09heighttax.html
Height is a prime example, according to Mankiw and his graduate student Matthew Weinzierl, because of its surprisingly strong correlation with income. According to one study they cite, the typical 6-foot American earned $5,525 more than a 5-foot-5-inch worker, after correcting for sex, age and weight. One possible explanation for the height-income correlation is that height breeds self-esteem from the teenage years onward; another is that tall people were, on average, better nourished as infants and so tote around a few extra I.Q. points in their craniums. In either case, their money bonus does not derive from their own effort, so taxing it would cause no economic distortions. Using optimal-taxation formulas, Mankiw and Weinzierl crunch the numbers and come up with a “tall tax” amounting to 7 percent of a tall person’s income. Short people would receive a 13 percent rebate.

the report shows that te highest destination of migrants out is Florida.
-----------

the biggest is teh commuter area (so those don't pay taxes to nyc, but still do to ny state). true, i would be more concerned about young higher income workers moving out (to say PA) than retirees (that barely pay taxes on their pensions/SS...) going to FL.

also, the transfer with CA is notable. we receive more from CA but also lose a lot. i wouldn't be surprised if we receive lower income and more latinos from CA and younger people with higher income move back there (but this is based on anecdotal info).

why not a fat tax? Peole who are fatter tend to need more health care services.

notadmin - then AboutReady would go bankrupt!

relax petrfitz, more than half of the country would be paying it. just to that they get more extra-cost transparency. it's not to solve social security, just to compensate extra spending in health. similar to what had been done with smoking.

actually, for my age group, i'm right at the 20th percentile for bmi. and i have a lot of muscle.

nice petro, good liberal that you are, man of the people and all that.
go take 50% of someone's takehome pay for a crappy studio, why don't you?

> Steve Forbes looks like a pedifile

He looks like an emory board for feet?

"AboutReady - then where did all these titans of industry go? Please answer me. If all these super contributers and wealth earners left, where did they go?"

California. Check the Forbes lists...

How about a fat tax? If you take up two subway seats, and do twice as much damage to the sidewalks....

Ahhhh. Riversider. My proposition would not adjust to age. So as we got more senile, it would automatically increase tax burden on older Americans wherby they'd have to sell assets to pay for the tax, thus eliminating estate taxes. Can you imagine your children spending months trying to prep you for the exam. Hahjaaha.

Ahhhh. Riversider. My proposition would not adjust to age. So as we got more senile, it would automatically increase tax burden on older Americans wherby they'd have to sell assets to pay for the tax, thus eliminating estate taxes. Can you imagine your children spending months trying to prep you for the exam. Hahjaaha.
-----------------

sure, but the really rich kids will hire the best tutors.

Why do people engage petrfitz and his idiotic arguments? He thinks foreign terrorists are protected by U.S. Constitutional rights? Why even bother arguing with something so stupid?

well, we've argued with you for quite some time as well. Should we stop that, too?

i love this. if you have brown skin and an accent and you try to kill people you are a terrorist with no constitutional rights. everyone else who does the same thing is a criminal.

the constitution of the united states applies to everyone in the united states. there are certain rights that accrue solely to citizens--and those specific rights are established in case law. but to suggest that the constitution has no application to foreigners in united states territory is just dead wrong.

We could have easily tried this guy in military court. It's a political issue and absent that could have gone either way.. Obama and Democrats made it a campaign issue that they were going to show the world that the United States follows rule of law.

It is entirely constitutional to identify those foreigners (non-U.S. citizens) who are engaging in terrorist acts supported by international organizations for the purpose of harming U.S. national security, and for national security purposes choose not to accord those non-U.S. citizens the same rights as U.S. citizens. Subjecting them to military trials is perfectly constitutional as long as the trials are fair. There is nothing unconstitutional about that process, and Obama has not said this is a constitutional issue. I would prefer to see our government protecting us rather than protecting foreign terrorists by giving them extra rights.

> there are certain rights that accrue solely to citizens

Remember that convicted felons, even the non-terrorist kinds, don't enjoy all the same rights as "citizens". Voting is just one that can be compromised.

Remember that convicted felons, even the non-terrorist kinds, don't enjoy all the same rights as "citizens". Voting is just one that can be compromised.

-------

since when having to vote for either obama or mc cain and "enjoy" go together? sound more like a punishment to me. anyway, are we back to tax policy? or to real estate?

i thought that the trial in downtown could have been bullish for manhattan's RE. think about all those temporary rentals that would have been needed for all those out of state reporters.

The trial in Manhattan was so we can show the world how civilized we are to a laughing audience.

lol, right on target RS

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/02/01/us/budget.html?hp

back to taxes, an interactive map on where the $ is going.

well, here is is:

"Marginal income tax rates for people with incomes over $200,000, or $250,000 for married couples, will jump from 33% to 36%, or from 35% to 39.6%."

Fing ouch.

And, worst part, I was going to do all that conversion to roth IRA.... but to lose another 5% on that. I might just not do it.

Where is John Galt?

"Marginal income tax rates for people with incomes over $200,000, or $250,000 for married couples, will jump from 33% to 36%, or from 35% to 39.6%."
-----

add to that FICA, property taxes, sales taxes... after the total tax burden, inflated housing, education and health care, how much discretionary income does the "rich" have? long time ago i thought their savings rates were astronomical, but they just cannot be unless their income is not coming from wages.

I'm just feel just so gosh darn lucy that Obama , Reid, Pelosi & Frank are better able to allocate my earnings than I.

This thread makes NPR look conservative

Yeah, I think Steve Forbes looks like an emory board for feet

or maybe a pedifile is where you store your feet.

"This thread makes NPR look conservative" ???????????

CRUSH THE RICH !! GO Big O GO !
Then the new class of apparchniks can RISE up and take their Estates

I Love It !!

On the Roth conversion, you can do it this year and elect to pay the taxes as 2010 income to avoid the higher taxes with the 2010-only ability to spread over 2011 and 2012.

I'm all for going back to pre-bush tax cuts, even for the middle class, which I'm part of. I'm you're still making 250K, you should consider yourself lucky. It's a terribly bad job market out there, and as someone said above, 77K is the median income for nyc.
The problems killing people are the high unemployment rate, stagnant wages, and the high health care costs. Fix those problems and most people are ok paying higher taxes because they understand that they need to share in the pain. It's funny how the people with less money are often the most generous in giving gifts, and it's also the same with taxes.

It's a no brainer that actual labor should be taxerd less than inheritances, capital gains, etc.

Hey Riversider should we continue the 50% net worth decrease and lose your home policies that the Republican party gave us? Remember this wasnt the first time your party ruined our country. We can thank your policies for the S&L scandal that wiped out America, and the Great Depression.

Oh yeah the last 10 years you guys held the Presidency and the congress, the country had the worst decade of economic performance in the history of our country.

Congrats.

"add to that FICA, property taxes, sales taxes... after the total tax burden, inflated housing, education and health care, how much discretionary income does the "rich" have? long time ago i thought their savings rates were astronomical, but they just cannot be unless their income is not coming from wages."

BINGO!

This is how my "effective" tax rate is close to 48%, while Dick Cheney's is 9%. The bulk of HIS income comes from his investments. The bulk of mine comes from selling my labor ... e.g., "wages".

Just read some of the proposals. Seems Obama has decided to do something on all fronts so nobody can accuse him of not doing something. This means tax credits for small business, jobs programs, more moey to justice for enforcement, more free trade, more taxing american companies for overseas investment, more money for nuclear. Some of these things are clearly good, but the motives appear very political.

"The problems killing people are the high unemployment rate, stagnant wages, and the high health care costs."

expensive housing is a bigger issue than high health care costs in nyc for most imho. many households still spend more than 40% of their gross income on housing in nyc.

"It's funny how the people with less money are often the most generous in giving gifts, and it's also the same with taxes."

it's funny how people fall into cliches easily when talking about money. people with less money fill their tax return right away cause most are getting $. i'm in favor of that. but to jump to moral conclusions is not clever. they are receiving the gift in that case, not "giving".

"It's a no brainer that actual labor should be taxerd less than inheritances, capital gains, etc. "

sure, but not a surprise that is not that way. it's not as mobile, transfer costs to a location where you get treated nicely are big. less and less collective bargaining, a social stigma associated to those that don't "work their ass off" even though it's not in their best interest.

the solution imho is the individual one. to try to follow what the rich do and attempt to have eventually the least proportion of income coming from wages. as things will not improve for the wage slaves. this is especially important for the young, as FICA taxes will keep on rising (not so the prospects of getting any of that $ back).

'it appears political'. Flmao.

Doctos perform surgery. 'it appears doctoral'
hooker gives bj- 'it appears hookeral'
riversider gives political opinion 'it appears opinionical'

$250K is rich i guess ...but still cant afford to buy a place to live in manhattan that's bigger than a shoebox

"Oh yeah the last 10 years you guys held the Presidency and the congress, the country had the worst decade of economic performance in the history of our country."

I didn't think perfitz could get any more dumb about politics, but wow...

> "It's a no brainer that actual labor should be taxerd less than inheritances, capital gains, etc. "

They are already taxed less.

Because the inheritances, capital gains... were already taxed once. The inheritance and capital gains taxes are just a second round. Very often the first round was at a higher rate than the tax on labor alone (assuming it went to higher wage earners).

Really, Eddie?

When you pay taxes on your income, and then go buy a slice of pizza at Joe's, should Joe be exempt because your two bucks were already taxed once?

If Richie Rich pays taxes on his income, do you seriously think 55-year-old Richie Rich Jr. should be exempt from taxes on the income he receives when Richie Rich buys the farm, just because it's unearned? How about Lucky Lotto Louie? Didn't all those Lotto players already pay taxes?

And how about when a corporation (an artificial person, says SCOTUS) pays taxes, and then an investor sells shares at a profit -- no distinct transactions by different entities there?

"Because the inheritances, capital gains... were already taxed once."

no matter whether it was grandpa joe that labored for that $ when there was virtually no income tax nor FICA? (ie, before the 40s labor was barely taxed). now that i think about it, that generation that got to labor almost tax free (the greatest generation) is the one that had in theory the best work ethics. was that coincidence?

somewhere else you are dishonest:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/01/AR2010010101196.html

a few points:

"The past decade was the worst for the U.S. economy in modern times, a sharp reversal from a long period of prosperity"

"There has been zero net job creation since December 1999. No previous decade going back to the 1940s had job growth of less than 20 percent."

"Economic output rose at its slowest rate of any decade since the 1930s "

These are the results of Republican economic policies.

aboutready
about 24 hours ago
actually, for my age group, i'm right at the 20th percentile for bmi. and i have a lot of muscle

yuck
is there any information about aboutready, excepting PII, that she will not share with us?

this are the historic tax rates so that somewherelse reconsiders regarding inheritances. i agree with buffett here, tax them at 90% to level the playing field. note that the maximum marginal rate back in the day affected less than 1% of workers. huge maximum marginal rates had the effect of lowering income disparities on a pre-tax basis as supposed to increasing revenue (high wage earners would just stop working pass that mark).

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-09-12.pdf

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

look at the bounty those from the greatest generation and the silent generation got or are getting! specially on medicare, for which they pay literally pennies with respect to the benefits that they expect to received or already received. they started paying 1/15th of what current workers are paying for FICA ... more than 60% of those that pay FICA and are young don't even expect it to get it back. so it should be added towards total tax burden for those that are 45 or 55 and younger.

"When you pay taxes on your income, and then go buy a slice of pizza at Joe's, should Joe be exempt because your two bucks were already taxed once?"

Bad analogy. Joe's should pay taxes, and they still will if I make money, pay taxes, put it in the bank, pay more taxes, but some stock and sell it, pay more taxes, and then buy the pizza.

> somewhere else you are dishonest:

Really, now. Perfitz, you JUST claimed that the Republicans held congress for the last 10 years (and are therefore responsible)...

and you are calling ME dishonest.

Wow. Either you are incredibly dishonest... or as dumb as we think you are.

somewhere else, why do you always say wow?

> high wage earners would just stop working pass that mark

Yes, that should be our goal! Bring that back! Would be AWESOME!

"look at the bounty those from the greatest generation and the silent generation got or are getting! specially on medicare, for which they pay literally pennies with respect to the benefits that they expect to received or already received. they started paying 1/15th of what current workers are paying for FICA ... more than 60% of those that pay FICA and are young don't even expect it to get it back. so it should be added towards total tax burden for those that are 45 or 55 and younger."

You mean the pyramid scheme really didn't work after all?

somewhereelse, where did you learn that all of your responses either have to be in the form of a question or sarcastic?

uf, you get lucky if you only got double taxed somewhereelse. in reality we get indefinetely taxed, the higher the velocity, the more we get taxed.

* alan worked and paid taxes on that wage... with a few after-wage tax dollars he goes and buys a slice of pizza at joe's.
* joe will need to pay taxes on the income he made selling the slice to alan... that tax gets to be included in the cost of the slice, so alan pays for it indirectly.
* the slice was handed to alan by pedro, who also pays FICA and a little bit of income tax on his minimum wage. that wage taxes also get to be included in the cost of the slice that alan just bought.
* and then also sales tax on the slice, that one is direct.

what has yet to be taxed? breading, movements (walking...), friendships, free sex (well... have to pay for accessories) ... BLOGGING!

> You mean the pyramid scheme really didn't work after all?

it's heading there. when do you think it will implode?

imagine if blogging were taxed, aboutready would be a net payer to our government rather than a net receiver of entitlements, damages, and special privileges

what i don't understand is why people just lie blatantly and think that is convincing. the "greatest generation" labored tax free? marginal tax rates in the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and even 1980s were significantly higher than they are now. so what the hell are you talking about? the high productivity gains and economic growth in the the 40s, 50s, and 60s took place during a period of highly progressive taxation with high marginal tax rates.

and much more significant deductions.

we're paying more in taxes as a percent of our incomes than we ever were....

not to mention, are y ou really saying that the laborers were paying the high marginal rates?

funny.