3 ms·
>As the reader can see, job cycles in the post-supply-side world (which began in the 80s) are significantly weaker than *job cycles in conditions in which the w
by ddxxdd 5y ago
>As the reader can see, job cycles in the post-supply-side world (which began in the 80s) are significantly weaker than *job cycles in conditions in which the wealthy paid a higher percentage of their income in taxes [presumably in the 50s and 60s]*.
-
>This bottom-up model, Keynesian economics, provides public support for the neediest, which keeps "subsistence" funds in the general economy, for things like energy, food, shelter, and medicine. *But Keynesian economics is also concerned with expanding and raising up the broad middle class so that we can move beyond subsistence and into a gradually increasing standard of living*.
These two statements demonstrate that the author is not an economist; the high mid-century tax rates was targeted towards a small handful of billionaires and left most people untouched, and proper Keynesian economics is only valid during periods of sub-zero interest rates.
- o_p 5y ago>These two statements demonstrate that the author is not an economist Thank god, I was worried it was going to be a waste of time
- willcipriano 5y ago> high mid-century tax rates was targeted towards a small handful of billionaires and left most people untouched Tax evasion was much simpler pre modern computing, the internet, credit cards, etc. The rate of tax is high on paper but the effective rate of tax was much lower. Not only that the tax code was (and is) riddled with loopholes. I'd say they had a high rate of tax for honest millionaires and millionaires who aren't friendly with some congressmen.