Was President Eisenhower a socialist ?

[OvertheEdge]

In 1954 under Republican President Eisenhower the highest tax bracket was 90%. <br />
<br />
http//bp0.blogger.com/_5aAsxFJOeMw/R_t1FvDtjHI/AAAAAAAAA6o/iECKyZxgikw/s1600-h/1954-vs-2006-marginal-income-tax-rates-0-17HH.JPG<br />
<br />
Obama plans to raise the top rate from 36% to 39%?to where it was in the 1990s. If that's socialism, the USA must have been ultra-socialist in 1954.<br />
<br />
http//zfacts.com/<br />
<br />

<br />
Joe the Plumber Was Duped<br />
<br />
The tax Joe fears falls only on the likes of Cindy McCain. Cindy has got poor Joe doing her dirty work?protecting the Bush tax cut for millionaires.<br />
<br />
Bush cut the top rate from 39% to 36%. Back when McCain was a maverick he voted against that. But when Obama says to push it back up, McCain calls him a socialist. Obama's just letting the top two tax brackets return to where they were before Bush cut taxes for millionaires and exploded the national debt.<br />
<br />
Joe is making $40,000. He needs 6 times that before his taxes go up. And even then he'd only pay 3% more on the part of his income above a quarter million dollars a year. If Joe earns a quarter million plus extra and has to pay 3% more on the extra, he'll think he's died and gone to heaven.<br />
<br />
But Cindy makes over $5 million a year. Joe wouldn't make that in a century -- it would take him 125 years. A 3% tax hike for her would cost her three years of Joe's wages every year. Three is not much out of the 125 she gets every year, but bothers her.<br />
<br />
Cindy and John McCain say a 3% hike on millionaires is class warfare. But under Republican President Eisenhower, the top tax bracket was 90%, and the rich were still rich -- not exactly class-war refugees. And Eisenhower was no socialist.<br />
<br />
Now there has been class warfare over the last thirty years and you know who's on the attack. Not Joe the Plumber or even Jill the Computer Geek. They make no quarter million a year. The multi-millionaires have attacked and won. They've gotten their taxes cut by more than half since 1978. And they call anyone who wants to turn the clock back even to 1990 a socialist and a terrorist. Now that's class warfare. <br />
[end quote]<br />
<br />
http//zfacts.com/p/1079.html<br />

<br />
Bloomberg Analysis [a top financial website]<br />
<br />
The company McCain said the plumber wants to buy has annual sales of $510,000, according to an analysis by Dun Bradstreet. That makes it [very] unlikely that Wurzelbacher's purchase would give him a taxable income of more than $200,000 -- leaving him unaffected by Obama's proposal to roll back tax breaks for those earning more than $250,000, said Steven Bankler, a certified public accountant in San Antonio, who counts plumbers and other trade professionals as his clients.<br />
<br />
Few such small businesses have enough income to be affected by Obama's tax changes, Bankler said.<br />
<br />
One other problem he would pay just $773 more in taxes under Obama's plan than McCain's if he did earn an adjusted gross income of $280,000, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation, a Washington research group that is critical of high taxes.<br />
<br />
Earning that much would make Wurzelbacher very unusual among small businesses. According to the Internal Revenue Service almost 95 percent of 21.5 million owners of small businesses who file as sole proprietors had receipts under $100,000 in 2007 [and would get a tax cut from Obama's plan].<br />
<br />
Another 4 million businesses organize as so-called subchapter S corporations, according to IRS data; less than 5 percent of them earn more than $200,000.<br />
<br />
`No Joe Six-Pack'<br />
<br />
If Wurzelbacher managed to earn $280,000, ``he's not an average Joe Six-Pack,'' said Gerald Prante, a senior economist at the Tax Foundation. [We need a tax foundation to tell us Joe 6-pack doesn't earn well over a quarter million a year??]<br />
<br />
Bloomberg, Oct. 17<br />
[end quote]<br />
<br />
wvparanormal -- It's a difference of 3% in the marginal tax rate (39% vs 36%). He would not pay anywhere near $7,500 more. <br />
<br />
Before I wrote this question, I roughed the difference to be $900 ($280K - $250K) x 3% = $900 more. <br />
<br />
The $773 difference is from the Tax Foundation, who are critical of high taxes, as I wrote. I think they know a wee bit more than us.<br />
censorshipoffools -- But Cindy has hair.<br />

 

[JuanMcCain]

Of course not. Even Adam Smith thought progressive taxation was reasonable. The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. - The Wealth of Nations.

 

[BrandonL]

The answer would be I don't know I wasn't alive during Eisenhower's Reign. I know that Carter was pretty close to being a socialist though.

 

[MrRothwyn]

Joe the Plumber is like most people now but he is doing this shtick so he can make over 250000 from book sales and public appearances and join the other fat cats who are trying to cut and run now. Anyone supporting that joker or the joke that is the McCain campaign is a joke and deserves to be made fun of.

 

[wvparanormal]

The only thing that matters in 2008 is the fact, and yes it is a fact, that Obama is a socialist.

I don't know where you learned math at, but at $249,999.00 currently and under both plans you would pay $89,994.64. That is until Bush's tax cut expires. Then McCain would extend Bush's tax cut and Obama would raise taxes. At $250.000.00, just $1 more at current rate, tax would be $90,000.00, $5.36 more. Under Obama's plan that $1 would cost $7,500.00 more.

$280,000 would cost $100,800.00 currently and under Obama's plan $109,200.00 a difference of $8400.00

Socialism has nothing to do with the raising of taxes. Socialism has to do with taking from those who have and giving to those that have not. It is not only socialism, it is Marxism. To give to those according to need and take from those according to ability.

The reason the percentage of small business making more than $250K is so low is because anyone with a business license is considered a small business. That's everyone from someone selling stuff at a flea market or front yard fruit stand all the way up to a C corporation.

 

[censorshipoffools]

its true what they say that if millionaires find out that they can buy democracy then we are screwed,.