Showing posts with label income. Show all posts
Showing posts with label income. Show all posts

Thursday, December 20, 2012

Peter Schiff on the 91% Tax Rate

The fiscal cliff is now at hand. The President’s decision not to sign anything that does not raise the rates of taxes on the top 2% is definitely debatable. The 1950s are being touted, by Paul Krugman and Warren Buffett, as the country’s most successful period – with 91% top tax rate and still unbelievably fast growing GDP and individual wealth. As their opponent in this argument appears Peter Schiff.

Krugman claims that the top income bracket faced a 91% tax rate during the 50s, corporate profit taxes being twice as large at the same time. Furthermore, he says that years of high taxation after the Second World War brought to the United States an excellent speed of economic development, a good example – the 1947-73 doubling of family income. Warren Buffet has a similar point of view – he claims that during the extreme 91% tax-period he sold securities quite well.

In a Wall Street Journal publication, Peter Schiff confronts these arguments. His answer – the 50s tax rate was ‘symbolic’. In fact, top earners had to experience lower rates, compared to wealthy people nowadays. On The Daily Ticker, Schiff comments further on his argument.

Sunday, December 16, 2012

Peter Schiff on CNBC

Eamon Javers (CNBC) informs of the recent developments concerning the ‘fiscal cliff’. On this debate about the tax raise on top earners, we have the CEO of EPC (Euro Pacific Capital) Peter Schiff and Richard Brodsky – senior Demos fellow.

In his words, Peter Schiff’s total income, as a top earner, is almost in half going to the federal government, due to taxation. And next year, when those new tax hikes strike, more than 50% of his earnings will be spent on government taxes. He claims that the majority do not have the right to ‘steal his money’ just because they voted to do so.

Those taxes are going to be paid by employees – Schiff says. The wealthy will invest abroad and stop working as hard as they do now. They won’t give so much money for taxes and neither will they recruit as many employees.

Saturday, December 15, 2012

Peter Schiff on the 91% Tax Rate

The fiscal cliff is now at hand. The President’s decision not to sign anything that does not raise the rates of taxes on the top 2% is definitely debatable. The 1950s are being touted, by Paul Krugman and Warren Buffett, as the country’s most successful period – with 91% top tax rate and still unbelievably fast growing GDP and individual wealth. As their opponent in this argument appears Peter Schiff.

Krugman claims that the top income bracket faced a 91% tax rate during the 50s, corporate profit taxes being twice as large at the same time. Furthermore, he says that years of high taxation after the Second World War brought to the United States an excellent speed of economic development, a good example – the 1947-73 doubling of family income. Warren Buffet has a similar point of view – he claims that during the extreme 91% tax-period he sold securities quite well.

In a Wall Street Journal publication, Peter Schiff confronts these arguments. His answer – the 50s tax rate was ‘symbolic’. In fact, top earners had to experience lower rates, compared to wealthy people nowadays. On The Daily Ticker, Schiff comments further on his argument.

Buy Gold Online