Why You Should Be Screaming for Higher Taxes
Belief:
Hot, Steamy Mormons: Are the Latter Day Saints Getting Sexy?
Liz Langley
Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
The Reason for 15 Million Unemployed: Poor Thinking at the Top
Dean Baker
DrugReporter:
DEA Forced to Scrub Misleading Info on the American Medical Association's Position on Marijuana
Charmie Gholson
Environment:
12 Crazy Futuristic Water Buildings That May Help Humans Survive Climate Change Catastrophe
* Staff
Food:
The 6 Weirdest, Scariest Processed Foods
Brad Reed
Health and Wellness:
Pentagon's Advice to Traumatized Veterans: Think Happy Thoughts!
Penny Coleman
Immigration:
Far-Right Anti-Immigrant Groups Are Polluting the Health Care Debate
Jill Garvey
Media and Technology:
10 Biggest Sports Sex Scandals of All Time: How Does Tiger Woods Rate?
David Rosen
Movie Mix:
Disney Apocalypse: Why 2012 Sucks
Alexander Zaitchik
Politics:
To the Hope and Change Crowd -- How's It Working Out for You?
Joe Bageant
Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Why Is the Federal Government Supporting Evangelism?
Eleanor J. Bader
Rights and Liberties:
Rachel Maddow Demolishes Therapist Who Claims He Can Make Her Straight
Sex and Relationships:
Why Fake Optimism Is the Worst Way to Deal with Life's Problems
Liz Langley
Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders
Water:
What the Frack? Poisoning our Water in the Name of Energy Profits
Peter Gleick
World:
Obama Accepts Nobel Peace Prize With a Pro-War Speech
Norman Solomon
US economic growth has been strongest when our taxes have been high. During World War II, then under Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy, our upper marginal tax rates were between 88-92%. Read those numbers again. They are astonishingly high. Those were our strongest growth years.
I never expected to say this. Pelosi's right, Obama's wrong.
Do keep in mind that we are talking about higher taxes on the richest members of society, the very richest. So, unless you're among that elite group, don't panic for personal reasons.
Keep in mind, also, that we are speaking only of income taxes.
You have certainly heard, several thousand times, that tax cuts lead to economic growth.
That's not true.
Moderate tax cuts lead to a flat economy. (The Johnson tax cuts, usually misnamed the Kennedy tax cuts, lead to 16 years of virtually no growth.)
Large tax cuts are followed by a boom in the financial sector, a bubble, and a crash. Then a recession or depression with massive bank failures. This has happened three times, in the 1920s, under Reagan, and under George W. Bush.
During a depression or recession, the point where taxes are increased marks the point when the economy begins its recovery: 1932 under Hoover, Roosevelt's second round of tax hikes in 1940, the first president Bush's tax hike, followed by the Clinton tax hike. (There's one exception. Roosevelt's tax hike of 1936, which was accompanied by cuts in government spending.)
US economic growth has been strongest when our taxes have been high. During World War II, then under Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy, our upper marginal tax rates were between 88-92%. Read those numbers again. They are astonishingly high. Those were our strongest growth years.
The next time we experienced strong growth -- not just in the fiscal sector, across the entire economy -- was after the Clinton tax hikes.
Why do tax hikes lead to strong economic growth?
Tax hikes usually correspond to higher government spending.
Government spends money on things that the private sector does not spend money on: physical infrastructure, social infrastructure, market infrastructure, and defense. These are the things that create a world in which doing business is possible. The worse those things are, the worse business is. The better they are, the better business is.
Rich people can't be trusted with too much money. If they have too much easy cash around, they get conned into Ponzi schemes, they go for quick money deals, they get suckered into bubbles, and then the whole economy crashes.
Can we have increased government spending without tax hikes?
No.
We can spend more than the government takes in -- if, and only if -- the following is true.
If the government is spending more than it takes in order to create an environment where more productive business is possible, then, at some point, the investment will begin to pay off and revenues will rise. If, at the same time, government spending declines (as a percentage of GDP), increased revenue will catch up with spending and the debt will be paid off.
Or -- since this is the real world, in which there are always new needs and new problems, and therefore new things to pay for -- the old debts will be caught up with and paid down, while new ones are taken on, hopefully to build new things that will pay off in turn.
See more stories tagged with: obama, taxes, stimulus plan, income taxes
Larry Beinhart is the author of "Wag the Dog," "The Librarian," and "Fog Facts: Searching for Truth in the Land of Spin." His latest book is Salvation Boulevard. Responses can be sent to beinhart@earthlink.net.
Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »
You've chosen to turn comments off for the entire site. Would you like to turn them back on?
Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.