Comments on: Bill O'Reilly and Cuban-Style Tax Rates http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/06/bill-oreilly-and-cuban-style-tax-rates/ The national media watch group Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:37:40 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: Gene http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/06/bill-oreilly-and-cuban-style-tax-rates/comment-page-1/#comment-10281 Gene Sun, 08 Nov 2009 03:26:53 +0000 http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=13282#comment-10281 Funny, the Reagan "tax cut" got rid of all interest deductions except mortgage. Think about it. Before this "cut." your Master Card, Visa, Sears, etc interest payments were deductable. Then they weren't. For the middle class tax payer, the interest deduction was (and is) almost always the largest. So what was the result of the tax cut for the middle class, Funny, the Reagan "tax cut" got rid of all interest deductions except mortgage. Think about it. Before this "cut." your Master Card, Visa, Sears, etc interest payments were deductable. Then they weren't. For the middle class tax payer, the interest deduction was (and is) almost always the largest. So what was the result of the tax cut for the middle class,

]]> By: Sortition http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/06/bill-oreilly-and-cuban-style-tax-rates/comment-page-1/#comment-10275 Sortition Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:17:22 +0000 http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=13282#comment-10275 By the way, to whatever extent Reagan "traded deductions for lower rates", it was a very lucrative trade for the rich. <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/98xx/doc9884/12-23-EffectiveTaxRates_Letter.pdf" rel="nofollow">In 1980, the top 0.01% of household paid 39.1% of their income in federal taxes. By the 1988 they were paying 32.2%.</a> By the way, to whatever extent Reagan "traded deductions for lower rates", it was a very lucrative trade for the rich. In 1980, the top 0.01% of household paid 39.1% of their income in federal taxes. By the 1988 they were paying 32.2%.

]]> By: Sortition http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/06/bill-oreilly-and-cuban-style-tax-rates/comment-page-1/#comment-10274 Sortition Sat, 07 Nov 2009 18:00:51 +0000 http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=13282#comment-10274 Randy, There are lots of deductions now as well, but that is beside the point. O'Reilly and his likes make the flat assertion that a high top income tax rate is un-American, deductions or not. This is simply historically wrong, as FAIR points out. By the way, if you want to make an argument about the history of deductions, please do - with the appropriate facts and sources, of course - I am interested. Randy,

There are lots of deductions now as well, but that is beside the point. O'Reilly and his likes make the flat assertion that a high top income tax rate is un-American, deductions or not. This is simply historically wrong, as FAIR points out.

By the way, if you want to make an argument about the history of deductions, please do – with the appropriate facts and sources, of course – I am interested.

]]> By: Randy Treibel http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/11/06/bill-oreilly-and-cuban-style-tax-rates/comment-page-1/#comment-10266 Randy Treibel Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:51:02 +0000 http://www.fair.org/blog/?p=13282#comment-10266 This is misleading journalism. I thought this was FAIR. The 90% in the 50s/60s was before a TON of deductions. So was the 70% in the 70s. Reagen traded the deductions for the lower rate in the 80s. This kind of journalism is tarnish on FAIR and proves FAIR is the equivalent of GAWKER at times. This is misleading journalism. I thought this was FAIR. The 90% in the 50s/60s was before a TON of deductions. So was the 70% in the 70s. Reagen traded the deductions for the lower rate in the 80s. This kind of journalism is tarnish on FAIR and proves FAIR is the equivalent of GAWKER at times.

]]>