Who is John Galt?

[mngundog]

Do I read this correctly: You are saying that the rich are now taxed more, and the middle & lower income levels are about the same.

Yet, the rich are still not paying their fair share?

No you did not read it correctly.

[Buzz]

I have looked at these numbers in the past, and spent a little time looking over them. It does appear at first blush that we are paying a lower tax rate. HOWEVER.... my question, which no one seems to be able to answer, is:
What was the EFFECTIVE tax rate during those years?

I don't really want to get involved in the discussions here again, but since you directed this at me, I'll try and give you an answer. Here is a graph I posted here quite a while ago. You have to sit and look it over a bit to grasp what it all means, but it is the clearest representation of what has happened to effective tax rates that I have ever found.

I won't spend time explaining the methodology. If you're interested you can look over the site yourself if you want to try and make a judgement on the veracity of the information. I think reading the information on the page I provided the link to below is worthwhile.

I got the link to the graph here: http://www.datapointed.net/2011/03/r...xes-1913-2011/







Now, according to the link here, the GNP is $15 trillion.

http://www.google.com/publicdata/exp...mestic+product

We are currently taking into the federal coffers around 15% of GDP, which should come out to $2.25 trillion. From what I have seen, the tax receipts over time might average around 18%. ( http://www.heritage.org/federalbudge...t-tax-receipts ) If we were taking in closer to that average we would have (18/15) x 2.25 = $2.7 trillion. An extra half trillion would bring our deficit back closer back in line...

[menmon]

Do I read this correctly: You are saying that the rich are now taxed more, and the middle & lower income levels are about the same.

Yet, the rich are still not paying their fair share?

What I'm saying is the high tax rates of the past were avoided by the folks that could and not by the ones that couldn't...pretty much the same as now except the higher marginal rates are much lower.

[coachmo]

Yet the rich still pay the overwhelming majority of taxes in this country. Go figure!

[caryalsobrook]

I don't really want to get involved in the discussions here again, but since you directed this at me, I'll try and give you an answer. Here is a graph I posted here quite a while ago. You have to sit and look it over a bit to grasp what it all means, but it is the clearest representation of what has happened to effective tax rates that I have ever found.

I won't spend time explaining the methodology. If you're interested you can look over the site yourself if you want to try and make a judgement on the veracity of the information. I think reading the information on the page I provided the link to below is worthwhile.

I got the link to the graph here: http://www.datapointed.net/2011/03/r...xes-1913-2011/







Now, according to the link here, the GNP is $15 trillion.

http://www.google.com/publicdata/exp...mestic+product

We are currently taking into the federal coffers around 15% of GDP, which should come out to $2.25 trillion. From what I have seen, the tax receipts over time might average around 18%. ( http://www.heritage.org/federalbudge...t-tax-receipts ) If we were taking in closer to that average we would have (18/15) x 2.25 = $2.7 trillion. An extra half trillion would bring our deficit back closer back in line...

Yes, you posted this before. the stated that 4 out of 5 dentists recomended them. I guarantee you that not even 1 out of 10 dentists HAVE EVER EVEN HEARD OF THEM. So much for their veracity.

they do draw pretty modern art though. Actually makes their work good for something.