The Onion Sums Up the GOP's Big Demographic Problem

[SezMe]

In the current context, I think you have that backwards: the Democrats are gambling that nobody will change their minds about Medicare. Which is why so many of them have been caught flat-footed.



I see liberals trying to enforce that more often than I see conservatives assuming that.

Explain to me how that enforcement is done.

 

[Ziggurat]

Did the rich flee the country during the Gilded Age when tax rates on high income people were much higher?

Bwahahahahaha! Did it ever occur to you to even check your history? For most of the Gilded Age there was no income tax. Epic fail, SezMe.

 

[SezMe]

Bwahahahahaha! yourself. I guess you didn't read your own link. Here, I'll provide another

In 1862, in order to support the Civil War effort, Congress enacted the nation's first income tax law.

In 1866, internal revenue collections reached their highest point in the nation's 90-year history—more than $310 million, an amount not reached again until 1911.

The Act of 1862 established the office of Commissioner of Internal Revenue. The Commissioner was given the power to assess, levy, and collect taxes, and the right to enforce the tax laws through seizure of property and income and through prosecution. The powers and authority remain very much the same today.

Yes, for some periods later it was removed and not reinstated until the early 1900s. But that doesn't negate my question.

 

[IchabodPlain]

Bwahahahahaha! yourself. I guess you didn't read your own link. Here, I'll provide another



Yes, for some periods later it was removed and not reinstated until the early 1900s. But that doesn't negate my question.

Do you remember your question? Refresher:

Did the rich flee the country during the Gilded Age when tax rates on high income people were much higher?

Can you demonstrate that the rates were higher? I don't think you can.

 

[Trakar]

Just to clarify here that every one is using the same time frame for "Gilded Age," everyone is looking at the what 1859 - 1920 time frame, correct?

 

[IchabodPlain]

Just to clarify here that every one is using the same time frame for "Gilded Age," everyone is looking at the what 1859 - 1920 time frame, correct?

I was taught that the Guilded Age ends before the 20th century, with the "Gay 1890's" marking the beginning and transition to the progressive era. I don't think I've heard historians refer to WWI or it's aftermath as part of the gilded age. Further, I hardly would think Teedy R's trust-busting would be considered part of it as well. Could be wrong. Feel free to double-check.

 

[SezMe]

Can you demonstrate that the rates were higher? I don't think you can.

That's a good point. No, they weren't higher, they were imposed in that period for the first time. So the question was based on a false premise. My bad. So, thanks to IchabodPlain, I will amend my question:
Was there a significant exodus when income taxes were first imposed in the Gilded Age? When top marginal rates were at or above 50%, was there a significant exodus from the USA?

 

[Ziggurat]

Bwahahahahaha! yourself. I guess you didn't read your own link.

That's a good point. No, they weren't higher

Oops!

Was there a significant exodus when income taxes were first imposed in the Gilded Age?

Nope. But then, the tax wasn't meant to be punitive, it was a hell of a lot lower, and mobility of both wealth and people were much lower. So... it doesn't really contradict anything I said.

When top marginal rates were at or above 50%, was there a significant exodus from the USA?

When the marginal rates were that high, the loop holes were also much larger, so that pretty much nobody actually paid anywhere close to that rate on any significant fraction of income.

 

[Trakar]

I was taught that the Guilded Age ends before the 20th century, with the "Gay 1890's" marking the beginning and transition to the progressive era. I don't think I've heard historians refer to WWI or it's aftermath as part of the gilded age. Further, I hardly would think Teedy R's trust-busting would be considered part of it as well. Could be wrong. Feel free to double-check.

I couldn't remember clearly myself, so selected a couple of examples from a quick google of "gilded age timeline"

and got a range of responses from 1868-1901 to 1959 - 1920, which is why I was seeking clarification from the primary perspective advocates. Such makes a difference with consideration to this issue and the posited question.

http://www.shmoop.com/gilded-age/timeline.html
1868 -1901

http://www.pinzler.com/ushistory/timeline7.html
1845 - 1916

http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/historyonline/gildedage_chron.cfm
1868 - 1899

http://savannahtah.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/gilded-age-instructional-unit-elem.pdf
1877 - 1917

1920 may have been a bit of an outlier, but there are many that carry it forward into the early 20th century, which was my reason for asking everyone specifically what time period they are referring to as the gilded age in reference to this issue.

 

[AlBell]

I'm unaware of anyone proposing to take assets. I think the idea is to tax income at a higher rate.

100% tax on income doesn't sufficiently increase revenue, ergo, go after assets.

That won't help much either is my point which is why I requested numbers.

 

[Eddie Dane]

Oh, look, it's another one of those "the Republicans are doomed long-term" threads that are so popular on JREF. What I do find amusing about this one is this bit:



Why do I find that amusing? Because back in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Baby Boomers were supposed to be the demographic trend that was going to lead the Democrats to victory for decades. In fact, Lanny Davis wrote a book in 1974 called The Emerging Democratic Majority based on this thesis. It didn't happen then. In 2002, Ruy Texiera and John Judis dusted off that title for a new book, with similar themes to that discussed in the NPR piece. They may have looked pretty good in 2006 and 2008, but they didn't exactly ring the bell in 2004 or 2010.

The demographic problem that the Democrats face is an aging population. People generally become more conservative as they age. Not everyone, certainly, but in any large group it's pretty consistent, even among minorities.

Good observation, that has not been rewarded with either a retort or praise as yet.

Seen as a wider issue: these predictions are folly anyway.
Demographics change, culture changes, economic circumstances change, politics change. Enter Chaos Theory.

As an example: Have you seen the extremist right-wing organisation EDL in the UK recently? It's led by a Sikh and has ethnic Jamaican members who are prejudiced against Muslims.
I wonder who predicted that development when the right was getting all hot and bothered against the parents of those very same Jamaicans moving to the UK?