Class warfare and the Left

care should be taken in comparing the income levels at which the top rate applies, not only because of the effects of inflation, but because the definition of the income base has varied over time.

However, these agencies were often quite successful in achieving their respective, narrower aims. The Department of the Treasury, for instance, was remarkably successful at generating money to pay for the war, including the first general income tax in American history and the famous "war bonds" sold to the public. Beginning in 1940, the government extended the income tax to virtually all Americans and began collecting the tax via the now-familiar method of continuous withholdings from paychecks (rather than lump-sum payments after the fact). The number of Americans required to pay federal taxes rose from 4 million in 1939 to 43 million in 1945. With such a large pool of taxpayers, the American government took in $45 billion in 1945, an enormous increase over the $8.7 billion collected in 1941 but still far short of the $83 billion spent on the war in 1945. Over that same period, federal tax revenue grew from about 8 percent of GDP to more than 20 percent. Americans who earned as little as $500 per year paid income tax at a 23 percent rate, while those who earned more than $1 million per year paid a 94 percent rate. The average income tax rate peaked in 1944 at 20.9 percent ("Fact Sheet: Taxes").

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/tassava.WWII

Tell me about a point of time in the history of our country when congress has proposed a 90% tax on any individual?

Context in this issue doesn’t matter. For any congress to do this threatens our very liberty.

while those who earned more than $1 million per year paid a 94 percent rate.

The class warfare had been intensified by GWB with his huge tax cuts for people who did not need the extra money...

Class warfare and the Left

The bill would impose a 90 percent tax on bonuses given to employees with family incomes above $250,000

Even Obama came out against that 90% tax on the bonus which further undercuts your argument.

So now we see class warfare on a level never experienced before in the US.

.. the rulers of the exchange of mankind's goods have failed, through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence, have admitted their failure, and abdicated. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men. ..

Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored confidence. They know only the rules of a generation of self-seekers. ..

The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. ..

Recognition of the falsity of material wealth as the standard of success goes hand in hand with the abandonment of the false belief that public office and high political position are to be valued only by the standards of pride of place and personal profit; and there must be an end to a conduct in banking and in business which too often has given to a sacred trust the likeness of callous and selfish wrongdoing. ..

we require two safeguards against a return of the evils of the old order; there must be a strict supervision of all banking and credits and investments; there must be an end to speculation with other people's money ..

Again, these taxes were not aimed at individuals for punitive reasons, as this congress just did with their 90% tax. You seem to be afraid to address this point.

Tell me about a point of time in the history of our country when congress has proposed a 90% tax on any individual?

You might want to check the historical tax rates before you go off on your "threatening our very liberty" jag.

http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

You will see that from 1944 until 1963 the highest rate was near or over 90% and was as high as 92% for part of that time.