4 ms·
Look at Federal tax receipts from the 1950's. Rates change but the amount of tax revenue taken in - as a percent of GDP - doesn't. Maybe you could change who'
by hackeraccount 2y ago
Look at Federal tax receipts from the 1950's. Rates change but the amount of tax revenue taken in - as a percent of GDP - doesn't.
Maybe you could change who's paying that money but I doubt it. In any case getting a bigger chunk of GDP into the governments hands seems like a fool's errand to me.
You could try to grow GDP but that's hardly better. Anyone who tells you they know how to make that grow faster is selling something.
- eesmith 2y agoYour own words show you understand that the tax burden has shifted away from the richest people. Don't focus so much on GDP, when the increasing Gini coefficient tells you it's unevenly distributed. It's especially odd given how single-income families were more common in the 1950s, so a lot of adults had no salary. If we really wanted to raise the GDP, use tax dollars to fund preschools. Unpaid parents (usually mothers) watching the kids for free isn't included in GDP. Paid teachers are. And those mothers can get a job, raising the GDP even more, all paid by a progressive taxation and wealth tax to help lower Gini. Eating steak every day is a fool's errand. The metaphor being used to justify austerity is even worse. I was explaining a reason why people might have downvoted that comment. That you have a different opinion is besides the point.
- consteval 2y ago> Anyone who tells you they know how to make that grow faster is selling something I don't know, ask FDR how he did it (hint: it did not involve less government spending or crippling agencies)
- hackeraccount 2y agoLook at government spending post WWII - it fell through the floor, yet GDP grew like topsey. Also the government is spending as much as percent of GDP as it did during WWII. You want to increase that?