Talking about marginal rates without discussing effective rates (due to deductions that were available, etc.) is quite misleading. That high 70% rate in the 70's brought in a tiny amount of tax revenue:
>...Of the $517 billion the Treasury collected in 1980, only $3 billion to $5 billion came from the 70 percent bracket — less than 1 percent of total tax revenue.
(One reason that democrats suggested lowering the top rate in 1981.)
Those high marginal rates encouraged all kinds of unproductive investments to take advantage of loopholes built into the law. Where people couldn't get around the rates, there were deadweight losses from economic activity that didn't occur. Even if someone thinks it is morally ok to take that much of someone's income, those kinds of high rates simply hurt the economy.
No it is not. The lowest capital gains rates were 12.5% and even 10 years ago it was 15%.
>...and at one point capital gains for top earners was 40%
When was it ever 40%? 50 years ago, it was 35%, but that was the highest.
https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/expert-insights/whole-ball-...
>....and income tax was even higher.
Talking about marginal rates without discussing effective rates (due to deductions that were available, etc.) is quite misleading. That high 70% rate in the 70's brought in a tiny amount of tax revenue:
>...Of the $517 billion the Treasury collected in 1980, only $3 billion to $5 billion came from the 70 percent bracket — less than 1 percent of total tax revenue.
https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2019/02/05/democrats-7...
(One reason that democrats suggested lowering the top rate in 1981.)
Those high marginal rates encouraged all kinds of unproductive investments to take advantage of loopholes built into the law. Where people couldn't get around the rates, there were deadweight losses from economic activity that didn't occur. Even if someone thinks it is morally ok to take that much of someone's income, those kinds of high rates simply hurt the economy.