Not if their income comes from wages.
If you look at their death rate since vaccines became widely available, it's been one of the highest in the country, a lot higher than NJ's or NY's. From what I remember, FL was having a few hundred deaths every day over the summer, before they stopped releasing their daily figures. Texas too. NY and NJ were having 20 or 30.
No, Clinton made the rate retroactive to Jan. 1 1993. I don't dispute Clinton cut taxes during his second terms, but the tax cuts were very small, compared to his tax increases. Federal income tax rates were still the same as his first term, and Americans were paying a lot more in taxes during Clinton's 2nd term than when Reagan was in office.
Japan has been having slow economic growth due to their population and work force declining in numbers.
They're not doing as well now, due to the policies of the current government. From the 1980s to the 2000s, their growth rate was phenomenal. China is currently doing more than any other major economy to move towards renewable energy. They produce the most electric cars and buses in the world, and they're the world leader in solar and wind power output.
We most likely would have had inflation in the 1970s without the oil embargo, but it would not been as bad as it was. Our economy was affected more than any other major economy by the oil embargo. In the 1970s, the US made up about 6% of the world population, but consumed approximately 1/3 of the world's oil supply. Today it's about 20%. I think that Germany and Switzerland had a supply of oil reserves, and we didn't. Also, gas taxes were much higher in those countries, so the percentage increase in the cost of gas wasn't as high in those countries.
No, monetary growth and velocity do not cause inflation. Here is a graph showing money velocity from 1960 - 2021.
https://i.imgur.com/dWPrrIf.jpg
Money velocity peaked in 1997, yet the inflation rate was 1.7% and 1.6% in 1998. The money supply also increased significantly from 1995 - 1999, yet the inflation rate was close to zero. In 2009 there was a massive increase in both government spending and money supply, but the inflation rate stayed close to zero. Inflation is caused by increase in demand and/or decrease in supply. This is very basic economics. Yes, there wasn't a significant increase in demand for oil in the 1970s, but there was a decrease in supply, which is why prices increased so much. Over time, the high price of oil led to a decrease in demand and an increase in supply, which resulted in the price of oil declining dramatically. That's how economics works.
I agree with the Fed targeting an inflation rate of around 2 percent. When the unemployment rate is high, and economic growth is slow, the Fed should increase the money supply and lower interest rates. When we have a low unemployment rate and strong economic growth, the Fed should raise interest rates. IMO, the Fed waited too long to raise rates in the 2000s, which led to the real estate bubble, and then to an economic and financial crisis when the bubble burst.
Most income tax revenue is from the current year. Taxes are taken out of your paycheck. Federal tax revenue did not double. Again, Reagan's tax cuts went into effect in 1982, not 1981. In 1981, the last year before Reagan's tax cuts, tax revenue was $599.3 billion. Tax revenue did not surpass $1.2 trillion until 1994, 13 years and two major tax increases later. Again, here is the chart:
https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/stat...outlay-summary
If you're really interested in economics, I strongly suggest taking an Intro to Economics class at a college or university, instead of reading books by right-wing commentators. If you don't have time for this, then try Father Guido Sarducci's Five Minute University. Economics is at approximately 1:40 in the video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO8x8eoU3L4