Tax cuts for rich do not spur job growth

The only thing that cutting taxes for the wealthiest one percent has been to concentrate the wealth even more in the one percent.


There is no clear correlation between tax cuts for high earners and economic growth, according to a new study by Congress’ nonpartisan policy analyst.

“There is not conclusive evidence, however, to substantiate a clear relationship between the 65-year steady reduction in the top tax rates and economic growth,” concluded a report by the Congressional Research Service released Friday. “Analysis of such data suggests the reduction in the top tax rates have had little association with saving, investment, or productivity growth.”

The study delves into the last 65 years of U.S. tax policy pertaining to high earning Americans — including top marginal rates on income and capital gains taxes — and how it impacts their decision-making. The conclusion: cutting effective taxes on the rich doesn’t boost economic growth, but it does correlate with rising income inequality.

“Throughout the late-1940s and 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was typically above 90%; today it is 35%. Additionally, the top capital gains tax rate was 25% in the 1950s and 1960s, 35% in the 1970s; today it is 15%. The real GDP growth rate averaged 4.2% and real per capita GDP increased annually by 2.4% in the 1950s. In the 2000s, the average real GDP growth rate was 1.7% and real per capita GDP increased annually by less than 1%,” wrote Thomas L. Hungerford, CRS’ specialist in public finance and author of the report.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012 ... fpnewsfeed

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/news/busin ... conomy.pdf

From the same study:

The authors noted that top-tier tax rates could have an effect on "how the economic pie is sliced." The study noted that in 1945, when the richest families had to pay a marginal tax rate of more than 90 percent, the top 0.1 percent of U.S. families accumulated 4.2 percent of all income gains. In 2007, in contrast, when the top marginal tax rate was 35 percent (which it still is), the top 0.1 percent of U.S. families captured 12.3 percent of all income gains.

Something the Dog Said wrote: From the same study:

The authors noted that top-tier tax rates could have an effect on "how the economic pie is sliced." The study noted that in 1945, when the richest families had to pay a marginal tax rate of more than 90 percent, the top 0.1 percent of U.S. families accumulated 4.2 percent of all income gains. In 2007, in contrast, when the top marginal tax rate was 35 percent (which it still is), the top 0.1 percent of U.S. families captured 12.3 percent of all income gains.

Surely those gains all trickled down to the middle and poor classes......there must be a study somewhere that shows how those whose wealth increased created jobs for the rest of us with that increase in wealth. Can a conservative here please show us those studies?

I question the political agenda of those who conducted this "study"- government employes I'm sure.

One thing I can say with 100% confidence, a tax increase on the rich- will not create ANY jobs. It will become a burden to investors- it will be a dis-incentive for business startups- and for the rich, instead of starting businesses and creating jobs, they will focus on ways to grow their money outside of the US.

Capital investments go where there are greener pastures- taxing the rich will draw more money away from America.

Taxing the rich will not help the middle class, it will not create any jobs, it will not promote investment, it will not help any business startups, and it will not increase the wealth of any Americans, rich or otherwise.

And I don't need a stupid ass government study to tell me that- and none of you should need one either. The only profit maker here is the GOVERNMENT.

Wise up people- class warfare hurts everyone.

Well there is one conservative who admits there is nothing out there that shows tax cuts on the rich create jobs and help the economy.

Then cut out the class warfare against the middle and lower income classes. As the study shows, and is a well documented fact, the income in the US has shifted by 300% from the middle and lower income classes to the wealthiest .1%
It is now become evident that increasing taxes on the wealthiest will not cause loss of job creation, as those individuals are not creating jobs anyway. They, as Rmoney has done, shifted their wealth into offshore tax havens, shifted jobs offshore to increase their wealth and refused to invest in the United States.

Something the Dog Said wrote: Then cut out the class warfare against the middle and lower income classes. As the study shows, and is a well documented fact, the income in the US has shifted by 300% from the middle and lower income classes to the wealthiest .1%
It is now become evident that increasing taxes on the wealthiest will not cause loss of job creation, as those individuals are not creating jobs anyway. They, as Rmoney has done, shifted their wealth into offshore tax havens, shifted jobs offshore to increase their wealth and refused to invest in the United States.

And your fix for this is what???? If you tax the top 1% at 90%, you will not get more revenue for long, and you would likely get a lot less as those 1% move to greener pastures.

RenegadeCJ wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: Then cut out the class warfare against the middle and lower income classes. As the study shows, and is a well documented fact, the income in the US has shifted by 300% from the middle and lower income classes to the wealthiest .1%
It is now become evident that increasing taxes on the wealthiest will not cause loss of job creation, as those individuals are not creating jobs anyway. They, as Rmoney has done, shifted their wealth into offshore tax havens, shifted jobs offshore to increase their wealth and refused to invest in the United States.

And your fix for this is what???? If you tax the top 1% at 90%, you will not get more revenue for long, and you would likely get a lot less as those 1% move to greener pastures.

No one is suggesting taxing the top 1% at 90%. However, it is clear that it does no good for the average American to keep shifting the tax burden away from the top .1% and on to the middle and lower income classes. My suggestion, cut off the tax loopholes, such as the ones RMoney uses to cut his tax rate from 35% to less than 13%, give payroll tax breaks to small businesses on new hires, give tax breaks to the lower and middle income classes who will immediately put that money into the economy rather than into offshore tax havens, increase taxes and penalties on those who move jobs offshore, be more aggressive after tax cheats like RMoney on things like $100,000,000 IRA's offshore, etc.

These have been proposed by the Democrats but stalled in Congress by the Republicans who insist that the wealthiest .1% must have even more tax breaks.

It is the lower and middle classes that drive the economy, not the wealthiest .1% who have shown no interest in job creation or in investing in the US.

RenegadeCJ wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: Then cut out the class warfare against the middle and lower income classes. As the study shows, and is a well documented fact, the income in the US has shifted by 300% from the middle and lower income classes to the wealthiest .1%
It is now become evident that increasing taxes on the wealthiest will not cause loss of job creation, as those individuals are not creating jobs anyway. They, as Rmoney has done, shifted their wealth into offshore tax havens, shifted jobs offshore to increase their wealth and refused to invest in the United States.

And your fix for this is what???? If you tax the top 1% at 90%, you will not get more revenue for long, and you would likely get a lot less as those 1% move to greener pastures.

That sounds like blackmail to me.....give us (the wealthy) more tax breaks or we will move to another country. I say, go, and see how you like doing business there.

Just who do you Liberals think are the job creators?

Wealth is created in this country by risk takers- those with financial resources to invest. This excludes the vast majority of the middle class these days- because most of us in that catagory are just trying to get by. Most of us are living month to month these days.

So just who is left to invest in new ideas- who is left to fund new business start-ups? The answer is- those with enough disposable income resources to take the risks. Here is why propaganda like this supposed "study" are outright lies at best- and flat out dangerous and anti-american at worst.

Taxing the best producers out of their profits will indeed lead to less investment- less savings- less spending - and less economic activity. That's the truth.

And while most high value individuals are laying low right now because the risks are too high- raising taxes on them will guaranty that they will never ever- ever invest in America again. It's as anti-american as it gets- fleecing America of it's wealth. It's a socialist guaranty that no-one will be able to become wealthy again.

In time, these policies will lead to more of what we got now- risk takers in elude mode- it will lead to an enormous negative effect on our economy. It will cost millions of future jobs to be lost - and those jobs that it dosn't kill - it will force over to other countries with less draconian tax structures.

It will lead to further - and accelerated loss of our standard of living. It will kill the golden goose that created the middle class in the first place.

If the rich are not the job creators- then who is? It's not the guy who just got laid off- it's not the single mom, it's not the family who is struggling- and it's damn sure not the government.

The last 4 years should tell ya that, again- wake up.

Explain to me how the middle and lower class are the job creators.....

These people spend money yes- but they spend that same money in a good economy- or a bad economy- so explain exactly how the lower and middle class are the job creators. They are not the job creators- because they are not the wealth creators! Especially not right now.