4 Comments
User's avatar
Matt Hill's avatar

So what were they spending the money on back then, defense?

Jack Salmon's avatar

In 1979 versus today (share of spending):

Defense = 23% vs 13% today

Soc Sec = 18% vs 23% today

Interest = 9% vs 14% today

Income Sup = 9% vs 7% today

Healthcare = 9% vs 24% today

Mark Soskin's avatar

Social security is NOT SPENDING to any REAL ECONOMIST! Spending is buying something disposable that was produced this year! Social Security is a TRANSFER PAYMENT from the WORKING POOR to the LONG-LIVED RICH who often don't need it or vice versa. Same with Medicare and Medicaid. The VA was socialized medicine until recently until they finally allowed Vets to get private health care. Defense is spending and investment from the private sector, socialism of hired underpaid enlistees, managing purchased products on government owned bases. Interest is a soon to balloon fraction of the budget that's also a transfer payment.

Mark Soskin's avatar

All true data, but cherry-picked data. The REAL MYTH is that high nominal tax rates seldom translated into high effective tax rates from tax loopholes in 1950s, 60s, 70s (also, most other taxes were regressive: property tax after shifting, sales, fees, payroll taxes (Social Security the most regressive public PENSION plan on Earth, and most other nations let short-life span, poor laborers retire at 55, not long-lived teachers and police "triple dippers"); every Academic research study found the NET IMPACT OF ALL GOV'T at most was Proportional (never progressive), since government contracting firms pay so well. Also, most capital gains are never taxed, but instead bequeathed as untaxed TRUST FUNDS, so most such U.S. wealth has never been taxed; meanwhile, these "locked in" unsold shares assure that inefficient CEOs are never fired (and only the U.S. allows stock buy-backs to inflate stock option value). And Economics was mastering how to fine tune the macro economy (JFK/Johnson flipping the yield curve stimulated investment and growth and Nixon coordinated Fiscal with Monetary Policy for the first time, Humphrey-Hawkins bill dealt with Phillips Curve new realities of supply shocks), internalized externalities of pollution and education, subsidized deficient local public services from bloated federal budgets, restrained hi-tech monopolies (IBM and Ma Bell) to restore real competition, risk-taking, innovation, and deregulated transportation, utilities, and professional services (doctors, lawyers, stock brokers, opticians, realtors, etc.) via Carter's entire cabinet of Economists.

But once econ became ideological, policy disappeared from economics as far-right billionaires purchased New Classical School endowed chairs, think tanks, private granting groups, and took over academic journals. After 45 years of Reaganism's "public-policy can only make problems worse" mantra, the result was deregulations and defunding that gutted consumer, worker, and environmental protections from asymmetric information and monopoly advantages of big business, allowed to grow exponentially without antitrust enforcement. Four enormous tax cuts for the super rich quickly created the greatest wealth inequality in the industrialized world, enough multibillionaires and trillion dollar firms to buy (and rig) the government, a higher yield and lower risk "investment" than real investment!