Tax Rates during the Fabulous Fifties

Did Rupert Murdoch and his commentators at Fox News think we were all a bunch of communists during the 1950s when we used to tax the rich, the banks, and large corporations? Why is it that now in 2011 they call this "punishing job creators for their success"?

WERE THE RICH BEING PUNISHED FOR THEIR SUCCESS IN 1955?

Why do the Republicans and the Tea Party fanatics keep saying that taxing the rich is an evil way to "redistribute the wealth"? Why do they equate fair taxation to Socialism or call tax hikes "job killers"?

WAS IT CONSIDERED SOCIALISM IN 1955 WHEN THE REPUBLICAN DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER WAS OUR PRESIDENT? WERE JOBS BEING "KILLED"?

The Republicans and the Tea Party fanatics keep complaining that taxes are too high, and they want to either lower them more than George W. Bush did, or eliminate them completely - - thereby FORCING the de-funding of Social Security and Medicare. That's their plan. But in reality, taxes today are already historically low! It would be irresponsible and reckless to lower them more than they already are now.

After World War II and the Korean War we had the Fabulous Fifties. Thousands of young servicemen had returned to America to pick up their lives and start new families in new homes with new jobs. With an energy never before experienced, American industry expanded to meet peacetime needs. Americans began buying goods not available during the war, which created corporate expansion and jobs. Growth was everywhere. The baby boom was underway.

Color TVs were being made and the remote was invented (and transcontinental television), DNA was discovered, the first atomic submarine was launched, McDonald's Corporation was founded, NASA was founded, The Sound of Music opened on Broadway, the AFL-CIO was established with 15 million members, the Federal Highway Act marked the beginning of the interstate highway system, Explorer I was the first U.S. satellite to successfully orbit the earth, and the first domestic jet-airline passenger service was started by National Airlines. Computers and the internet were also first being developed in the 1950s.

But back then we used to tax the rich at a 91% top marginal rate for income taxes, and we taxed corporations and banks 52% on their profits. Was this socialism? Were we unfairly taxing the wealthy and big business? Were we "punishing the job creators for their success"? Were we unjustly "redistributing the wealth"? Why do the Republicans equate fair taxation to Socialism or call tax hikes "job killers"?

In the 1950s people could afford single family dwellings and suburbia was born. A small suburban community called Levittown was built. American education underwent dramatic and world shattering changes.

Fifties clothing was conservative. Men wore gray flannel suits and women wore dresses with pinched in waists and high heels. French fashion designers such as Dior, Chanel and Givenchy were popular and copied in America. We had fashion successes like Bill Blass and his blue jeans.

Families worked together, played together and vacationed together at family themed entertainment areas like Yellowstone Park and the new Disneyland.

1955 Chevy

Drive-in movies became popular for families and teens. Cars were seen as an indicator of prosperity and cool-ness. Highways were built to take people quickly from one place to another, by-passing small towns and helping to create shopping plazas and malls.

But back then we used to tax the rich at a 91% top marginal rate for income taxes, and we taxed corporations and banks 52% on their profits. Was this socialism? Were we unfairly taxing the wealthy and big business? Were we "punishing the job creators for their success"? Were we unjustly "redistributing the wealth"? Why do the Republicans equate fair taxation to Socialism or call tax hikes "job killers"?

We liked watching and dancing to Dick Clark's American Bandstand. When the 1950s are mentioned, the first type of music to come to most people's minds is rock 'n roll. Popular artists such as Bill Haley, Elvis Presley, and Jerry Lee Lewis were on the radio. There was Buddy Holly and Ritchie Valens - the influence of these early rockers had been felt in popular music worldwide.

But music in the fifties was more than just rock 'n roll. Crooners like Nat King Cole, Frank Sinatra, Perry Como and Dinah Shore were all popular too. Many of these singers were the idols of the rockers who developed the new sounds. They did shows at the casinos that were blossoming in old Las Vegas.

TV shows were born: The Honeymooners, Lassie, Father Knows Best, The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet, I Love Lucy, The Ed Sullivan Show and the Johnny Carson Show; and daytime soap operas like Guiding Light.

But back then we used to tax the rich at a 91% top marginal rate for income taxes, and we taxed corporations and banks 52% on their profits. Was this socialism? Were we unfairly taxing the wealthy and big business? Were we "punishing the job creators for their success"? Were we unjustly "redistributing the wealth"? Why do the Republicans equate fair taxation to Socialism or call tax hikes "job killers"?

All-American sports such as baseball and football gave opportunities for the rise of stars like Jackie Robinson, Roy Campanella, Hank Aaron, Jim Brown, and Frank Gifford.

As television became more popular and available, other sports found a growing numbers of fans. College football was widely followed. Professional golf became very popular with stars like Arnold Palmer and helped to create the idea that to succeed in business, men needed to play golf.

People watched the Olympics 1952 and 1956, and in part due to the Cold War, when the rivalry between countries became very fierce. Sports like tennis, basketball and boxing were also popular in the fifties. We had Wilt Chamberlain, Sugar Ray Robinson and Rocky Marciano.

How did this country, and all the corporations today (those that were born and/or prospered in the 1950s), survive during those "higher-tax" years? How did so many people become so rich during this time in our history, and accomplish so much, if the tax rates were unfairly taxing the wealthy and big businesses? In 1955, were we "punishing the job creators for their success"? Were we unjustly "redistributing the wealth"?

Senator John Boehner was a kid during the 1950s, just like me. He and most members in Congress are well aware of that time in American history. And just like me, they saw this country prosper and thrive as they were growing up...despite the higher tax rates. That was when our great middle-class had been born and thrived.

They know very well that right now in 2011 we have a revenue problem, not just a spending problem. Why do they keep denying that?

And ALL the Republicans know very well that when George W. Bush made his tax cuts, it was the first time ever (in all of U.S. history) that the United States engaged in any major war without ever raising taxes. Just the opposite was true...taxes were drastically reduced, and primarily so the uber-wealthy would benefit the most - - such as with capital gains taxes, which have been at their historically lowest level for the past 9 years!

So why are the Republicans deliberately strangling the tax revenues that we need to keep a healthy and functioning government and economy? Haven't their tax cuts done enough harm to this country and its people already over the last 9 years? Haven't the rich been enriched enough? Can't we rebuild our middle-class and repair our infrastructure now? Can't we begin to start making America great again, instead of just creating a few more greedy millionaires?

I pity the younger generation today, for not having the opportunities that once existed, and not being able to say that they grew up during a great time in American history. Their stories will be more like that of my grant-parents, when they grew up during the Great Depression.

Corporations are STILL making record profits, and CEO pay is still going higher, as our wages decline. They now have $2 trillion sitting idle, that they don't even know what to do with, and yet the Republicans STILL refuse to tax them. But even if we were to roll back all the Bush tax cuts tomorrow (never mind, back to the 1950's tax rate), and immediately ended both wars, it would STILL take many years to recover. And if the Republicans have their way, and for every day that goes by, this country will only slide further and further into decline.

Historical Tax Rates on the Rich (from 1862 to 2011)

Low Corporate Taxes = Excessive CEO Salaries It doesn't matter what a corporation pays in taxes as compared to GDP, or how it's compared to any other index of measure (to skew the numbers), it's what they actually pay to the U.S. Treasury after loopholes (aka "deductions") that matters most. And for the last 25 years corporations have actually paid historically low taxes. While today some corporations may have paid the maximum rate of 35% (when it was over 50% in the 1950s), many others paid ZERO, with the average being only 18%. The same can be said for their CEOs and other high-income earners. While although the top bracket is also almost historically low (at 35%, when it was once over 90%), what they actually pay is nearer to 15% because the majority of their income is earned through capital gains. And because corporations have been paying a low effective corporate tax rate for decades, that didn't keep them from outsourcing jobs overseas for cheap labor, but rather, it did enable them to pay very excessive CEO salaries...who only mostly pay 15% in federal income taxes on their capital gains.

My Related Posts:

• Subsidies for the Rich and Famous
• Historical Tax Rates on the Rich (1862 to 2011)
• The Second Gilded Age: History Repeats Itself
• Mellon: The Banker Who Rigged the U.S. Tax Code
• The GOP Tax Plan - Ignorance, Insanity, or Greed?
• We have a Revenue Problem, Not A Spending Problem
• 280 Corporations are "Too Big to Tax"
• Trickle-Down Economics: The Cruel 30-Year Hoax
• You Pay Hidden Entitlements for the Rich
• Record Profits + Record Bonuses = Zero Jobs
• Mom Pays More Taxes Than Bankers!
• It's not Class Warfare - it's just "Business"

Other Related Articles:

• "The richest 1 percent have more financial wealth than the bottom 95 percent combined."
• The total net worth on the Forbes 400 List marks $1.5 Trillion in 2011
• The Global Super-Rich Stash: Now $25 Trillion
• Historical Tax Rates and Time-line
• Capital gains from Citizens for Tax Justice
• 1977 - 2007 tax rates from U.S. Treasury
• Economic Policy Institute on capital gains taxes
• Capital gains explained from U.S. Internal Revenue Service
• The great corporate tax scam
• The top 1% took home 23.5 percent of income in 2007, the largest share since 1928