Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

JHB

(38,326 posts)
15. Those ARE adjusted for inflation. In the acutal 1955 numbers...
Fri Nov 8, 2013, 08:34 PM
Nov 2013

...the top rate kicked in at $400,000 for a married couple filing jointly, $200K for single, and $300K for the "head of household" category. And it wouldn't be 90%, it would be 81 at the top levels, only 11 % above the 1980 top rate, which kicked in at a much lower level.

And I have no problem with negotiating and dickering over what better rates would be. There's nothing inherently correct about these ones. But neither is it the sort of "airy-fairy ivory-tower liberal ideology" RWers would like to claim, it's the policy that we had in this country for decades, during a time of prosperity, operating as one of the tools that let the prosperity extend widely and not just all shoot to the top.

I don't propose this as a solution, but I do propose it as a starting point.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»This message was self-del...»Reply #15