For Democrats, a Tax-the-Rich Road to Victory

Most discussions on this subject mention the top marginal rates of the past (91% in the 50s, 70% in the 60s and 70s, 50% through most of Reagan's presidency, etc.)

I like to highlight a different aspect: leaving aside what the rates were, where did they kick in? We live in times where people argue "are couples who make $250K 'rich'?" "Should we raise taxes on people who make over $250K? Over $500K?"

Where did these sorts of things lie in the past?

Using the inflation adjusted historical tax bracket tables from The Tax Foundation for married couples filing jointly, let's break it down a little and find out the equivalents in 2012 dollars:

1945:
Total number of brackets: 24
# of brackets only affecting income over $250K: 14
# of brackets only affecting income over $500K: 9
Top bracket affects income over: $2,551,044

1955:
Total number of brackets: 24
# of brackets only affecting income over $250K: 16
# of brackets only affecting income over $500K: 11
Top bracket affects income over: $3,426,776

1965:
Total number of brackets: 25
# of brackets only affecting income over $250K: 13
# of brackets only affecting income over $500K: 8
Top bracket affects income over: $1,457,740

1975:
Total number of brackets: 25
# of brackets only affecting income over $250K: 9
# of brackets only affecting income over $500K: 5
Top bracket affects income over: $853,509

1985:
Total number of brackets: 15
# of brackets only affecting income over $250K: 1
# of brackets only affecting income over $500K: 0
Top bracket affects income over: $360,650

1995:
Total number of brackets: 5
# of brackets only affecting income over $250K: 1
# of brackets only affecting income over $500K: 0
Top bracket affects income over: $386,423

2005:
Total number of brackets: 6
# of brackets only affecting income over $250K: 1
# of brackets only affecting income over $500K: 0
Top bracket affects income over: $383,773

2013:
Total number of brackets: 7
# of brackets only affecting income over $250K: 2
# of brackets only affecting income over $500K: 0
Top bracket affects income over: $440,876

Special Bonus Gipper edition numbers:
1988:
Total number of brackets: 2 (No, not a typo. Two brackets)
# of brackets only affecting income over $250K: 0
# of brackets only affecting income over $500K: 0
Top bracket affects income over: $57,738
(There was a reason why Poppy Bush had to go back on his 'Read My Lips' line -- this rate was so low it was unsustainable (naturally, the RWers crucified him for it). And RWNJ billionaires and their tebagging useful idiots want to go back to this, or lower...)

ALL income tax progressivity for very high incomes was eliminated under Reagan, and has stayed that way ever since.

Old Saint Ronnie.

But the public is against the anti-tax ideology. We can win on this issue if Democrats were only willing to pursue it.

Excellent post. I'd also be interested in seeing how the percentage of households with two wage earners has changed over that period. When I was growing up most of the mothers stayed home, with a few exceptions which were mostly teachers. A family could live a very comfortable middle class life on one salary, and children weren't forced to spend so much of their time without any parental involvement. AND few people needed to set up a "college fund" the day after a child was born just to try to get them a decent education. Since the "Reagan Revolution", I can think of very few married couples with children that don't need two incomes just to get by.

I knew it was true, just did not know how they did it.

...to gain popularity and provide real relief, while taking a chainsaw to rates at the top.

We all know the answer to that..

When I was born, Dwight Eisenhower was President. The top marginal tax rate was 91%. The top corporate rate was 52%. The national debt was $276 billion and didn't reach $300 billion until I was five years old. It didn't hit $400 billion until I was 14. The rich were still rich, and the rich still got richer every year. We had enough money to pay for the construction of an interstate highway system, raise the minimum wage, create the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, and in many states you could get a college education without a student loan. We balanced the budget three times under Ike, and despite the fact that the Democrats had a majority in both houses of Congress during Ike's entire term, there were a total of two cloture votes, and both of them failed. There were zero filibusters, and almost every person Eisenhower nominated to any office was confirmed.

Ah, the "good old days". Maybe if the Republicans wanted to take us back to 1958 instead of 1858 we might have something here.

or become highly paid lobbyists, after their public service.

This provides a huge built-in disincentive for these folks to support significantly higher taxes on the rich.

It would be a like a tax on the rich, but also a boost for the poor.

Make a maximum income of about $5 million per year, and not allow an accumulation of more than 5 times that amount.

Poor fucking babies will have to live on surf and turf for breakfast.

Pump all that money into the economy where it will do some real good, instead of buying our political system.

-Laelth

electoral strategy.