… the difference is the Republicans want to raise them on the middle class and the poor. The Democrats want to raise them on the rich who can afford it.
First, Michelle Bachmann wants to revert back to the Reagan Tax Code of 1981. But she probably is too dumb to realize that that would mean of massive increase in taxes. In 1981, Reagan’s first year, the top tax rate was 70 percent, and it applied to individuals earning $108,300 and couples earning $215,400. (Those are 1981 dollars, in 2011 dollars, the top level would be closer to 300,000 for individuals and 350,000 for couples). The top rate dropped immediately to 50 percent in 1982 and stayed there through 1986. In 1987, the top rate fell again to 38.5 percent, still higher than it is today. Hey, I am all too willing to tax the rich at 70% or 50%. I will settle for 40%. But again, Michelle is a dim bulb, so let’s not count her as being representative of the Republican Party on taxes.
I think Herman Cain’s plan is representative. Sure, he was attacked by his primary rivals in the debate for the his 9-9-9 plan, but the plan itself pretty much represents general Republican thinking on taxes. Republicans want to cut taxes for the rich, again and often. Every economic fix they can think of includes a massive tax cut for the rich. They also think the middle class and the poor do not pay enough taxes. Why else would they be harping on the false and misleading 47% figure. They want the poor and the middle class to pay more. They want flat income taxes. They want higher sales taxes. The Herman Cain 9-9-9 plan does all that. Don’t believe me, here is some charts for your enjoyment:
Under the Republican plan, everyone who’s not already rich gets poorer. Everyone who’s already rich gets richer. And that’s what they want. That is the Republican policy goal: to eliminate the middle class. As an aside, I had a laugh when radical Christianist David Anderson endorsed the 9-9-9 plan and said “growth would be so great that you would have to hide under a bed not to get a job.”