Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

US Budget 2029

USA Budget The future Future NASA

  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#61
Zachemc2

Zachemc2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 507 posts

The top marginal bracket stayed the same in 1980 and 1988. It was anyone who made over $250,000. It doesn't count for inflation, but I doubt the dollar was devalued more than 80% between 1980 and 1988 lol. There are inflation calculators online. I'll run it through really quick:

Turns out the 100 billion was only 70 billion in 1980 dollars. Still 3.5 times more revenue by cutting the tax rate so severely.


Inflation can do funny things. If 100 billion in 1988 was 70 billion in 1980 then $250,000 in 1980 would be just north of $350,000 in 1988, which means that there would suddenly be a lot more people in that top bracket. Maybe even 3.5 times more people.

The tax cuts allowed more people to go into that bracket because less money was being taken away from them.

#62
Unrequited Lust

Unrequited Lust

    He Who Would Swallow God

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 559 posts

The top marginal bracket stayed the same in 1980 and 1988. It was anyone who made over $250,000. It doesn't count for inflation, but I doubt the dollar was devalued more than 80% between 1980 and 1988 lol. There are inflation calculators online. I'll run it through really quick:

Turns out the 100 billion was only 70 billion in 1980 dollars. Still 3.5 times more revenue by cutting the tax rate so severely.


Inflation can do funny things. If 100 billion in 1988 was 70 billion in 1980 then $250,000 in 1980 would be just north of $350,000 in 1988, which means that there would suddenly be a lot more people in that top bracket. Maybe even 3.5 times more people.

You know what, that's actually a really good point. If this were true, then the 30% and 70% would be equal, and the extra 40% would be stimulus with the 30% tax rate and totally lost with the 70% tax rate.

I need more statistics. How many were in the upper bracket in 1980 and 1988? What was the median and average income for both?

#63
Wesfky

Wesfky

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 154 posts

With the 70% tax rate, the total revenue for the top margin was 37 billion dollars 1980. With deductions, the government collected 19 billion. After the tax cuts, the total revenue of the top margin was 353 billion dollars. The government took all 30% of that and got 100 billion in 1988. By slashing taxes from 70% to 30%, the government collected 5 times more revenue.


It was clearly not effected in anyway by Reagan's deregulation and destruction of the unions. Which allowed business to make more profit, by exploiting people.

#64
Zachemc2

Zachemc2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 507 posts


With the 70% tax rate, the total revenue for the top margin was 37 billion dollars 1980. With deductions, the government collected 19 billion. After the tax cuts, the total revenue of the top margin was 353 billion dollars. The government took all 30% of that and got 100 billion in 1988. By slashing taxes from 70% to 30%, the government collected 5 times more revenue.


It was clearly not effected in anyway by Reagan's deregulation and destruction of the unions. Which allowed business to make more profit, by exploiting people.

No. They just are more prosperous.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: USA, Budget, The future, Future, NASA

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users