In “Why we really shouldn’t keep the Bush tax cut for the wealthy”, Professor Robert Reich fairly sets forth the arguments for and against retaining the tax cut for the very wealthy and then comes to a conclusion which is overwhelmingly supported by history and the facts.
It starts: “Here’s a guide to the perplexed.
“From a strictly economic standpoint — as if economics had anything to do with this — it makes sense to preserve the Bush tax cuts at least through 2011 for the middle class. There’s no way consumers — who comprise 70 percent of the economy — will start buying again if their federal income taxes rise while they’re still struggling to repay their debts, they can’t borrow more, can no longer use their homes as ATMs, and they’re worried about keeping their jobs.
“But the same logic doesn’t apply to people at the top, earning over $250K, who represent roughly 2 percent of tax filers. Restoring their marginal tax rates to what they were during the Clinton administration (36 and 39 percent) won’t inhibit their spending. That’s because they already save a large portion of what they earn, and already spend what they want to spend. (During the Clinton years the economy created 22 million net new jobs and unemployment dropped to 4 percent.)…
It concludes: “I’m not suggesting this, mind you, but just to get the debate started: How about restoring the top rate to where it was under John F. Kennedy (76 percent), or under Dwight Eisenhower (91 percent)?”
We encourage you to use the above link to read the entire article which also appeared in the Intelligencer Journal and HuffingtonPost.com.
