tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6151938248821114337.post5301771150207565505..comments2023-06-26T10:02:55.794-05:00Comments on RightSideProject: Rewriting RealityUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6151938248821114337.post-77087222908081706372009-02-09T18:10:00.000-06:002009-02-09T18:10:00.000-06:00Context: The FICA tax was raised as part of a dea...Context: The FICA tax was raised as part of a deal that was a result of that favorite DC creation, the bipartisan commission, chaired by Alan Greenspan. In general, it has been the Democrats who have insisted on retaining Social Security in its current regressive design, because they thought if benefits were delinked from contributions the program would lose its widespread support.<BR/><BR/>Reagan would have preferred to privatize Social Security but there are only so many battles you can fight in one administration and he already had plenty on his plate. <BR/><BR/>The top rate was reduced from 70% to 50% in Reagan's first round of tax cuts in 1981. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 reduced the top rate to 28% effective in 1988 (it was 38.5% in 1987). Once again, political realities prevented him from reducing it all the way to 28% in one fell swoop. But he got it there eventually.viachicagohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12796391857768287833noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6151938248821114337.post-26763393975579979042009-02-06T13:15:00.000-06:002009-02-06T13:15:00.000-06:00Don't forget Reagan's great accomplishment of rais...Don't forget Reagan's great accomplishment of raising the FICA tax to build up a trillion dollar surplus, that thank god Hank Paulson saw fit to distribute via TARP.<BR/><BR/>It defies common sense that raising the regressive FICA tax while cutting the rate on high earners from 70% to 28% is not intended to direct more wealth to the already wealthy. (Also, I think the top rate didn't go to 28 until 1987.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com