Want 1950's Taxes? Accept 1950's Spending

Camper

Not a Member
What a nostalgic concept: A government that actually lives within its means..


News Headlines


As the debate over raising the debt ceiling in the United States lurches onward, one analyst tells CNBC that if America wants to keep taxing its people like it's the 1950’s, it will need to significantly cut back on spending.


"If the U.S cut around two-thirds of today’s Navy, it would bring defense spending back to where it was in 1950" relative to each era's tax levels, says an economist.


“In 2009 and 2010, federal government receipts stood a little below 15 percent of GDP,” said Paul Donovan, a global economist at UBS in London.

“Clearly the political focus at the moment is on federal revenues, and for the past two years, these have stood at the lowest level since 1950,” said Donovan.

The problem is that in the 1950’s, the federal government’s deficit stood at around 1 percent of GDP.

In 2010, it stood at 10.6 percent of GDP according to Donovan.

“Over the past six decades, some spending programs have remained modest,” he said.

The problem is that others have not remained so modest, and the biggest drains on the federal budget are as one may expect.

“In spite of having just ended one war, and embarking on a further conflict (in Korea), defense spending in 1950 at 4 percent of GDP was less than the 2010 4.7 percent figure," he said. “To put that in context, if the U.S cut around two-thirds of today’s Navy, it would bring defense spending back to where it was in 1950.”

“This suggests that if America wants to have 1950s-style taxes then it needs to make some significant efforts on its spending.

Spending on defense, social security, and health care in the United States of 2010 is far removed from the 1950-style revenues it is receiving,” said Donovan The only other option is of course higher taxes, something the Republican Party is in no mood to accept from the White House.

“The U.S has the third-lowest general government revenue" in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, said Donovan, referring to government revenues as a percentage of GDP.

The OECD's 34-nation membership comprises mostly Western and other developed nations.
 

Dakota

Veteran Expediter
Actually, not only the government, everyone needs to live within their means.
I'm included in that as I have debt too:(
I am working my Debt snowball as we speak.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Honestly, if we would return to the 1950 tax code, we would not be able to handle it as a country full of cry babies. Not because of what is said in the article but because there are a lot of taxes that were applied we do not have today.

I understand the opposite from the position of the article, revenue would be greater than what we have today and it would not matter if the spending cuts took place.
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
We as a country could live just fine with the tax structure as it is today (although it is a "progressive system that punishes the top earners and yes should be restructured) IF the government got out of the way of business and removed even 50% of the restrictive regulations that keep them in check...get rid of the biggest corporate tax code in the world , close the epa, get rid of the entitlement programs that corporations also have to partically fund (now add barrycare to the picture) and the list goes on.

Government has regulated businesses to the pont that in alot of cases, it is no longer profitable for them to be here...jobs are gone....let the corporations work as they should and jobs will come back, people will be put back to work, and tax revenue will be just fine......

Now that being said, forgetaboutit....the government particularly the left feel the need to "take care of the people" and they need those "feel good entitlement programs" to do that...and to stay in power, they need to continue to spend on the "entitlement crowd"...to keep their votes....so no spending s not going to go down, until they are forced to....
 

Camper

Not a Member
Actually, not only the government, everyone needs to live within their means.
I'm included in that as I have debt too:(
I am working my Debt snowball as we speak.

An old Japanese compact and a singlewide accomplish the same as that new SUV and McMansion. It's all a matter of not falling into that "Keeping up with the Joneses" mentality.



Posted with my Droid EO Forum App
 

mcavoy33

Seasoned Expediter
Government has regulated businesses to the pont that in alot of cases, it is no longer profitable for them to be here...jobs are gone....let the corporations work as they should and jobs will come back, people will be put back to work, and tax revenue will be just fine......

So all the jobs have moved to Mexico because of too many regulations? It doesn't have anything to do with the rate that they are willing to work for?

Instead of losing jobs to Mexico, why not just let as many Mexicans as wanted come in and work here and pay taxes here?
 
Last edited:

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Gov regulations and the highest corp tax in the world are the major reasons that we lose jobs to other countries...and mexico is not the biggest employer of those lost jobs....so letting illegals come here is not the answer....

Wages are secondary to taxes that corps pay and the regulations that are imposed on them, they would gladly pay the wages americans want, if the corp taxes and gov regulations were not stripping them of corp profit...and please forget the greedy corp crap, no one gets into business to exchange money...they/we do it to make whatever profit they/we can for the corp structure including the shareholders...
 

Camper

Not a Member
Gov regulations and the highest corp tax in the world are the major reasons that we lose jobs to other countries...and mexico is not the biggest employer of those lost jobs....so letting illegals come here is not the answer....

A Fed induced inflationary environment is another reason jobs have been and continue to be offshored.



Posted with my Droid EO Forum App
 

Tennesseahawk

Veteran Expediter
In the 50s, the top marginal income tax was 91%.

BTW... we're the 2nd highest in corporate taxes. Japan is first, and their recession (depression) is going on 25 years. Think about that, for us!
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Don't know where some of this information comes from but the cost to do business in this country starts with the following;

labor (including benefits)
regulation compliance
liability insurance
taxes

Of which many of the large corporations do not pay their share of taxes and many medium corporations pass the cost onto their customers. Who hurts the most is the small corporations and even than they pass a lot onto the customer.

Labor costs on the other hand are uncontrolled. With many "mandates" from the states and feds, it has become so complex to hire and maintain a labor resource that it is easier (but not always cheaper) to move production somewhere else.

The other issue that many seem to not get is that we can bring back all these "jobs" to the country but the companies will not hire the same amount of workers that were needed to do the same job as they did in the foreign land or back when they produced something because production techniques have improved the use of labor. So those 20,000 jobs that GM exports if returned, can now become 5000 jobs.

We can return to the 1950 tax code but we will pay a lot more in taxes that we think, it wasn't all sunshine and lollypop living back then.
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Corp don't pay anywhere near the taxes they could, but its not against the law to use the system to their benefit and it is encouraged..and the taxes they do pay, are passed on to the consumer and always will be..so yes they don't actually pay all of their taxes, but they are taxed.....And any increase in their taxes will be again passed on to the consumer....
 

Tennesseahawk

Veteran Expediter
Exactly! WE pay corporate taxes! Every time my dad complains about corporations needing to be taxed more, I tell him corporations don't pay taxes... we do, when we buy stuff. Any raise in their taxes goes directly to price increases.

Profits WILL stay the same. Remember a couple of years ago, Nancy the Hag Pelosi was wanting to tax windfall profits of the oil companies? Sorry... those were taxes on us, but sounded good to the normal American lemming, cause that would teach those big bad oil companies a thing or two, to mess with us CNN-edukatid Amerkans.
 

mcavoy33

Seasoned Expediter
Exactly! WE pay corporate taxes! Every time my dad complains about corporations needing to be taxed more, I tell him corporations don't pay taxes... we do, when we buy stuff. Any raise in their taxes goes directly to price increases.

But it taxes the people who actually can afford to buy those goods and services. It actually taxes the right crowd imo.

Its almost like a consumption tax in that regard.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
So the solution is what?

NOT having any corporate taxes?

Maybe we should try that for once?

By the way, no one seems to bring up the hidden tax issue with corporations.
 

Camper

Not a Member
This whole notion of going after corporations and those in the top 2% as is preached by the brain trusts in Washington is an exercise in futility. They provide the lion's share of revenue. Raising their taxes is akin to biting the hand that feeds you. Hence the incentive for them to offshore operations and taxable assets.

Posted with my Droid EO Forum App
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
1950's tax rates lead to a pretty rough recession. I remember the layoffs my dad went through during those times. High taxes hurt.

Kennedy knew that. He LOWERED taxes, the economy recovered.

There was even a "jingle" at the time. It encouraged people to
"buy a car" to stimulate the economy.
 

Dakota

Veteran Expediter
1950's tax rates lead to a pretty rough recession. I remember the layoffs my dad went through during those times. High taxes hurt.

Kennedy knew that. He LOWERED taxes, the economy recovered.

There was even a "jingle" at the time. It encouraged people to
"buy a car" to stimulate the economy.

By a GM vehicle to support Obama:eek::rolleyes:
 
Top