Posted on 01/06/2019 7:10:03 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
Likely 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Julian Castro agrees with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez that tax rates on some of the wealthiest Americans should skyrocket.
"Oh, I can support folks at the top paying their fair share," Castro told ABC News' "This Week" on Sunday when asked directly whether he could endorse the high-profile New York Democrat's idea.
The Obama-era Housing and Urban Development secretary, who is expected to officially announce he's running for the White House this week, made the comments after Ocasio-Cortez caught flak for suggesting people earning more than $10 million could be taxed between "60 or 70 percent."
In offering support to Ocasio-Cortez, Castro provided historical context given the current highest marginal income tax bracket is 37 percent for those receiving more than $500,000 a year.
"There was a time in this country where the top marginal tax rate was over 90 percent, even during Reagan's era in the 1980s it was around 50 percent" the former mayor of San Antonio, Texas, said.
Castro also floated "that we get more serious about making sure the corporations pay their fair share," so the country can fund policy programs like "Medicare-for-All," as well as universal pre-kindergarten and higher education.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Oh and I get the $174,000 being Congressional salaries, but many people in high cost-of-living areas are making that much and yet are very middle class and would not appreciate even joking about this...
We need to cut spending, not increase taxes. Why does no one even consider cutting spending?!?!?
More like a raw deal and they don't even get so much as a "thank you" for funding the government.
Everybody here prefers cutting spending to raising the size and cost of government. But its useful to make imbecile freshperson congresspeople become accountable to their own advocacy. Id wager most Americans would agree that 174,000 is a level which could be described as high earnings. Little cherubs like Antifa-Cortez should have to be made to argue that she is too poor to pay her fair share. Of course I believe excessive taxes are immoral.
On paper, yeah, there was once an excessively high maximum tax rate, but.....because of exemptions and deductions and tax shelters, nobody paid it.
Anyone who thinks Joe Kennedy gave away 90% of his income is nuts.
In fact, the alternative minimum tax was devised during the mid-1960s precisely because there were a lot of very wealthy people who escaped paying any income taxes at all.....even when the maximum tax rate was 90%.
Sounds like complete idiocy to me. Do us all a favor, move to Venezuela and take your idiot girlfriend with ya.
They are trying to take away Latino vote, but they know what’s up. It’s pandering and they know the path to continued success is with President Trump’s American First plan. I’d just say look at their platform time and time again and look at just two years of Trump.
In Macroeconomics, many years ago, I was told that no one ever really paid that much, because there were plenty of loophole sin the tax laws.
I don’t think that Pumpkin Spice knows shes going to get arkancided if she keeps this up toward 2020. For her safety she should go back to dancing.
Castro also floated “that we get more serious about making sure the corporations pay their fair share,” so the country can fund policy programs like “Medicare-for-All,” as well as universal pre-kindergarten and higher education.
-—Translation:
Castro also floated “that we get more serious about making sure the corporations which we control pay their fair share”, so the country can fund policy programs like “Poverty-for-All”, as well as universal pre-kindergarten indoctrination and higher SJW education including re-education camps for adults who are not sent to labor camps.”
Exactly. Taxing new income won't scratch the surface. They will have to reach into seizure of wealth to make sure everyone pays their "fair share".
That is an easy question to answer from their perspective. The answer is you will have a "fair society".
If you want examples of why a national sales tax is a bad idea, just look at the VAT tax in Canada, UK, and most of Europe.
This article reminds me of the story of a rich entrepreneur in the 50s, back when the tax rates actually WERE 90 percent. It was told to me by a close relative. The entrepreneur had become wealthy making automobile repair equipment. One day he decided he was going to start up a new airline. At first others thought he might be expanding his empire into what was at the time a fledging new industry. However, the competition was great, and his airline never made any profits. When asked what made him decide to enter such a competitive industry, his reply, “I had to give away all my income to the government, anyway. At least with an airline, I could interview and hire stewardesses.”
The VAT tax is a bad idea because where it's been implemented, there is also a national income tax. Those taxpayers are being double dinged.
The Fair Tax (national sales tax) that has been proposed for the US, replaces the current income tax.
Huge difference.
and a sales tax is NOT a VAT tax ... 2 different things ...
That is an easy question to answer from their perspective. The answer is you will have a "fair society".
As Bob Dylan said, "Everybody must get stoned." Or, in this case, "Everybody must be poor." Just goes to show how SICK the dummocraps are. They are denying nature to carry on with their stupid agenda of total equality. In any group, whether it's growing baby chicks or humans, you will have those who grow faster (in the case of the chicks) and those who are more successful in surmounting life problems and being more successful, earning more, having a more attractive spouse, etc. (humans). That's just the way it is. The dummocraps are trying to deny this. If they stepped back and kept their greasy hands at their sides, even among groups of poor people, some superior individuals would emerge over a generation or two, and just blow that absolute equality thing all to heck.
The Fair Tax is fine, EXCEPT for one part: the Prebate. The Prebate is a “negative tax” (i.e., a welfare payment) that Congress gets to set. I don’t want politicians in the tax determination at ANY stage. If you do, you’re going end up with the same mess you have now. Can the Fair Tax and go with a Flat Tax of 17%. If you truly have a flat tax, you wouldn’t even need to file a tax return since all revenue sources would withhold 17%.
That's exactly what they said in Canada, and guess what...
That's exactly what they said in Canada, and guess what...
I'm not familiar with Canada's tax law history, but I take that to mean that their parliament passed a national sales tax that was layered on top of an existing income tax.
That's a sin.
The Fair Tax proposal for the US has always included the provision that such legislation would simultaneously abolish the income tax.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.