Income Taxes and Economic Growth

No more taxes for the rich cable to lower economic growth? You can also reduce taxes on the richest Americans to create new wealth incalc cheap nfl jerseys ulable, you can reach the masses? Consider these facts: In the 1960s, most federal tax rate applies only to rich people in the United States, an average of 89.4%, while real GDP per capita by an average of three years grew 5%. In the 70 years the maximum federal tax rate was reduced grew at an average of 70.2% but real GDP per capita by only 2.3% on average.

1980 we have Ronald Reagan and his solution to the slower economic growth in the 1970s had was, you guessed it, tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. However, real GDP per head slightly to 2.28% on average over 80 years, although the tax rate on the Federal Government sl

ashed to 48.4%. During the 1990’s the maximum tax rate was lowered to an average of 36.7% and the economic growth that had been promised time and time again? Real GDP per capita only managed to grow a paltry 1.99% annually.

President George W. Bush spent a great deal of time and political capital lowering taxes on the wealthiest Americans and what did it bring us? From the beginning of 2001 to the end of 2006, growth of real GDP per capita slipped to an annual average of 1.53%. That’s less than half of the rate of real economic growth experienced in the ‘60’s when federal income taxes on the wealthiest Americans were over twice as high.

We currently hear a renewed cry out of Washington that the tax rate paid by the wealthiest Americans once again must be lowered to stimulate our economy and bring us o nfl jerseys ut of the current recession. But, as history shows, lower taxes on the wealthy won’t automatically lead to an expanding economy.