The income tax was only 16 years old at that point. If the author is right about lowering income taxes on the rich causes the economy to crash, then the US would have never become the largest economy in the world around 1900. So that debunks his thesis that the economy can’t flourish with low income taxes on the wealthy, since it flourished with zero income taxes.
Originally, only 7% of people even made enough money to pay income tax. It was a tax that only applied to the upper income people. So his idea that cutting taxes on the rich to punish the working class is a fantasy. The working class weren’t even paying income taxes, so it’s not they had to pay more because the rich got lower tax rates.
He completely ignores the root cause of the great depression which is easy credit. People were easily able to buy stocks on margin. Every bubble and crash in history can be traded back to easy credit. Once people think you’ll always make money on an investment, they’ll loan anyone money to make that investment.
They also grossly mislead on Clinton. Clinton cut the tax rate on capital gains. The top 1% earn 39% of their income from a paycheck. The rest is investment income. So while it appeared Clinton raised taxes on the rich, they actually came out of it with a nice tax cut.
Then the author completely ignores the no-doc loans which causes the real estate bubble and subsequent crash.
It’s honestly scary someone would publish that garbage.