The US at its pinnacle, 1953 Time magazine

[Angrycat]

Quote from Optional:

Yeah, but people were also slim and trim back then...fat fucks now need 3,000 sq houses to fit their Super Sized asses through the doors....
and they can't afford them...

LOL!!!!!!

 

[leela]

Quote from KINGOFSHORTS:

People were saving, Taxes were high though, homes required only one person working to meet mortgage obligations. Lots of growth in the US etc..

8% gain in income in 1 year. (between 52-53)

Interestingly enough one person in the article made 49K but paid 21K in taxes.

Pretty high yet they were doing fine. So it seems higher taxes did not seem to have a negative impact.

Then somehow it began to go downhill. I suspect when we got into the Vietnam conflict it began our path towards destruction over a very long period.

http://books.google.com/books?id=i0...MBAJ&lr=&as_brr=0&rview=1#v=onepage&q=&f=true

49k in 1953 = ???k in 2009 ?

 

[GG1972]

Eventually it was always the wars constantly waged that couldnt be supported by the revenues generated that led to decline of empires such as the Roman empire, british empire etc.

History has a tendency to repeat itself.

 

[Scataphagos]

Quote from 5_wave_decline:

no, we're just headed toward equality

one big fucking ghetto

THAT'S the Obama promise..

 

[jficquette]

Quote from leela:

49k in 1953 = ???k in 2009 ?

Here is some Info. Saids average income in 1950 was $3216. So 50k is 15 times the average. That would equate to about $450k today.

So if you made $450k today you would pay around the same in % in taxes, depending on which state you live in.

http://www.fiftiesweb.com/pop/prices-1950.htm


http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ocs/liheap/guidance/SMI75FY09.pdf

 

[Angrycat]

Quote from leela:

49k in 1953 = ???k in 2009 ?

Using of inflation rate of 4% (which is the long term average over the period).


$49K in 1953 = $441,000 in 2009.

Taxes of $21K represented a 43% tax rate in 1953.

If you live in NYC today and make the equivalent $441K , your tax rate is above 50% (including federal, state, and local).

No way in hell were tax rates lower in 1953, then. No wonder they were getting buy OK. the government was stealing less.

 

[Angrycat]

Quote from Angrycat:

Using of inflation rate of 4% (which is the long term average over the period).


$49K in 1953 = $441,000 in 2009.

Taxes of $21K represented a 43% tax rate in 1953.

If you live in NYC today and make the equivalent $441K , your tax rate is above 50% (including federal, state, and local).

No way in hell were tax rates lower in 1953, then. No wonder they were getting buy OK. the government was stealing less.

Sorry.

I meant to say there's no way in hell taxes were HIGHER in 1953.

 

[Angrycat]

Dammit. I don't know how the hell my post got so garbled. "getting buy"? I'm just tired and I was concentrating on getting the calculations right. Sorry about that. But, you get the gist.

 

[Illum]

It's just the media of that time blowin smoke up your ass.

 

[Misthos]

Quote from Angrycat:

Sorry.

I meant to say there's no way in hell taxes were HIGHER in 1953.

Yes they were... actually they were REALLY HIGH. Until Ray-gun and Art Laffer.

go to http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html it will surprise you.

There were a lot more tax brackets then.. If you made 49K then, the top bracket for dollars made between 44K and 50K was 71%! The money made below was taxed less... but not as less as you might think - go to the link above.