Quote:
Lower tax rates do not mean less tax revenue.
The tax cuts of the 1920s: Revenues from personal income taxes increased substantially during the 1920s despite a reduction in rates. Revenues rose from $719 million in 1921 to $1.164 billion in 1928, an increase of more than 61 percent (this was a period of virtually no inflation).
|
http://mutualfunds.about.com/cs/1929...ck_tuesday.htm
Quote:
Black Tuesday - October 29th, 1929
[...]
By the end of November, investors had lost $100 billion in assets in what was later called "The Great Stock Market Crash." In just two months, September and October, the stock market had lost 40 percent of its value. Black Tuesday usually marks the point where the Roaring 20’s ended and the Great Depression started.
|
And for the end of your bits.
Quote:
|
Fact #1: According to data from the Internal Revenue Service, the top 1 percent of income earners pays more than 30 percent of the total income tax burden; the top 10 percent pay more than 60 percent; and the top 25 percent pay more than 80 percent. The bottom 50 percent of income earners, on the other hand, pay less than 5 percent of the total income tax burden.
|
The response is...
http://www.worldrevolution.org/Proje...Inequality.htm
Quote:
The top 1% of households own almost 40% of the nation's wealth.
The top 10% of Americans own over 70% of nation's wealth.
The top 20% of the nation's households own 85% of the nation's total wealth.
The top 60% of households own almost 100%, or 99.8%, of the nation's wealth.
The bottom 40% of households own one-fifth of 1% (or 0.2%) of the nation's wealth.
The bottom 80% of Americans own only 15% of the nation's wealth.
|
So the top 1% pay 30% of the income tax burden, but own 40% of the wealth in the nation? Compare and contrast at will from there.
Edit: I'd also like to pose a question that just occured to me: If the bottom 50% of income earners pay only 5% of income taxes... well, leaving them income-tax-free wouldn't hurt much at all, would it?