Not a good week for indiana

Steve, the difference in our perspectives, as I see it, is that you view reduced taxes as giving the "rich" the ability to "put their money away," while I see small business people and professionals in their prime earning years (you and me) investing their money, i.e. fueling our capitalist machine.

By the way, I'm a registered Independent... social moderate, fiscal conservative, issue voter (saves everyone the trouble of labeling.) lol
 
OCDinPDX said:
Trickle-down economics is a made-up term fabricated by the liberals when it should have been called by its proper name, capitalism, all along.
Click to expand...

Dang it! Do they teach history in school these days? Go back and read a little history. This term probably dates back as far as the Depression.

And in the what I learned today on DC category...George H.W. Bush was a liberal, since of course he labeled Reganomics "voodoo economics". Sheesh, all the things I never knew.
 
JohnHenry said:
Cheap shot, Scott. We've got the whole range of the political (and socioeconomic) spectrum represented here. No need to be personally insulting.
Click to expand...

It was not a cheap shot. It was only used as an example of erroneous assumptions that can be made by limited interaction on a forum.
 
Seems like this thread is due to be broadened to include a discussion on firearms. :cool:

I'm not one of the people who believe that one man can't make a difference. Certainly no one person, by themselves, can shoulder the burdens or take credit for the successes, of the world (Al Gore came close). The course is laid one man at a time.:exactly:
 
Here is the CBO budget history.

This shows when Reagan took over the tax cuts made the deficit much worse than during the Carter years (which has been bad by standards then). After several years, the economy recovered some so the debt reduced but still high by prior year standards. When Bush I too over it dived even more.

When Clinton took over the deficit reduce dramatically and led to a long period of economic expansion (exuberance of the stock market was evidence).

Bush took over as the bubble popped. He passed tax cuts so the deficit went up but dropped slightly until the financial meltdown caused massive deficits (TARP). Bush did poorly from a budget despite controlling the Congress.

Obama inherited the budget in 2009 so 2010 is going to be his first true budget and he like prior presidents chose to spend our way out of the recession but did not rely solely on tax cuts which seems to rile some people.

budgetdeficit14-640.png


So why is Reagan so good and Clinton is so bad. I think Clinton accomplished more because in the end he compromised with the House and by raising taxes the Fed did relax interest rates that caused the economic expansion.
 
Bunky said:
Here is the CBO budget history.

This shows when Reagan took over the tax cuts made the deficit much worse than during the Carter years (which has been bad by standards then). After several years, the economy recovered some so the debt reduced but still high by prior year standards. When Bush I too over it dived even more.

When Clinton took over the deficit reduce dramatically and led to a long period of economic expansion (exuberance of the stock market was evidence).

Bush took over as the bubble popped. He passed tax cuts so the deficit went up but dropped slightly until the financial meltdown caused massive deficits (TARP). Bush did poorly from a budget despite controlling the Congress.

Obama inherited the budget in 2009 so 2010 is going to be his first true budget and he like prior presidents chose to spend our way out of the recession but did not rely solely on tax cuts which seems to rile some people.

budgetdeficit14-640.png


So why is Reagan so good and Clinton is so bad. I think Clinton accomplished more because in the end he compromised with the House and by raising taxes the Fed did relax interest rates that caused the economic expansion.
Click to expand...
The first part of the Clinton term was not good but when the conservatives took over congress they balanced the budget and things got good.

When the government don't run a high deficit things pickup.

Obama is going to spend us into prosperity.

Try that on your budget and come back in a year and let us know how it worked for you.
 
black bart said:
`All this does not change the fact that when Regan cut taxes the government took in MORE money.

Now you Liberals can twist it any way you want but the facts are when he cut taxes revenue increased.
All I did was mention what was on the news but Any time Obama's name is mentioned You\Steve and Scott P can not resist giving us the far left view. Scott will be along shortly.
Steve did a excellent job of rewriting history in his post but their is no way to support your Idealogical view without changing what really happened.
Click to expand...

You are correct.

In the 1920's, the tax rates were slashed from over 70% to less than 25%. The result? Tax revenues increased from $719 million in 1921 to $1164 million in 1928, an increase of more than 61%.

Hoover dramatically increased the tax rates in the 1930's. Roosevelt compounded the problem by raising the marginal rate to more than 90%. Kennedy reduced that rate down to 70% and tax revenues climbed from $94 billion in 1961 to $153 billion in 1968, an increase of 62% (33% after adjusting for inflation).

In the 1980's, Reagan proposed sweeping tax rate reductions. The result? Total tax revenues climbed by 99.4% during the 1980's.

Now the rebuttal by the left is always that the rich pay less when tax rates are cut. Well, it is one thing to project anger as fact and another to address real fact without feeling.

The fact is that the share of taxes paid by the top 10% of earners rose from 48% in 1981 to 57.2% in 1988. The top 1% of earners in that same time period saw their income tax bill rise from 17.6% to 27.5%.
 
JaredPointer said:
And religion. :)
Click to expand...

Speaking of which, I just heard on the radio earlier while I was out in the shop that a new poll came out saying that something like 40% of Americans still incorrectly think Obama is a practicing Muslim. Amazing how ignorant and quick-to-judge some people can be. :huh:
 
Shiny Lil Detlr said:
Speaking of which, I just heard on the radio earlier while I was out in the shop that a new poll came out saying that something like 40% of Americans still incorrectly think Obama is a practicing Muslim. Amazing how ignorant and quick-to-judge some people can be. :huh:
Click to expand...

The amazing part of this statement is that in this case "some people" equals roughly 37%.
 
black bart said:
The first part of the Clinton term was not good but when the conservatives took over congress they balanced the budget and things got good.
Click to expand...

I think you just agreed with me. Republicans running the government is no guarantee of low deficits or prosperity. During the Clinton years, it came with raising taxes that somehow did not smother capitalism. It was less about cutting spending but the economy growing.

The deficit for the next few years is going to be very bad but if you read my comments I am not saying I agree with all the spending. Both sides have used deficit spending to get out of recessions.

I believe in balanced budgets and I do think it will take a combination of tax reform (increases in some areas), spending cuts in defense, revenue sharing back to states that funds a lot of the pork (Alaska gets $5 back for every $1 they contribute), limiting agri-business welfare (farm subsidies), and entitlement changes (capping social security and medicare). The problem is you will not find an republican or democrat that could campaign and win on that platform.
 
JohnHenry said:
Steve, the difference in our perspectives, as I see it, is that you view reduced taxes as giving the "rich" the ability to "put their money away," while I see small business people and professionals in their prime earning years (you and me) investing their money, i.e. fueling our capitalist machine.

By the way, I'm a registered Independent... social moderate, fiscal conservative, issue voter (saves everyone the trouble of labeling.) lol
Click to expand...

Yes, Jay I would think that is pretty accurate. I am in no way "rich" , but the tax refunds or breaks have not really affected the way we live or save. We have a plan and stick with it, barring incidentals like kids braces, or glasses, etc..
I really have to thank Gearhead for some insight a few years ago that changed my savings perspective and my outlook on my mortgage. It really did work and I believe I am doing better after his advice :bigups
 
Shiny Lil Detlr said:
Speaking of which, I just heard on the radio earlier while I was out in the shop that a new poll came out saying that something like 40% of Americans still incorrectly think Obama is a practicing Muslim. Amazing how ignorant and quick-to-judge some people can be. :huh:
Click to expand...

I don't know what his religious preference is. And frankly, I don't really see why it matters to me (or anyone else, really). Just my personal opinion and all.

I've taken some heat here lately regarding the fact that I said I supported what he said about the "mosque" being built "right on top of" the WTC site. You'd think from the reaction I've gotten out of some people around me that I had killed a baby or something.
 
JaredPointer said:
I've taken some heat here lately regarding the fact that I said I supported what he said about the "mosque" being built "right on top of" the WTC site. You'd think from the reaction I've gotten out of some people around me that I had killed a baby or something.
Click to expand...

I think Obama said it best earlier. In today's political world, everyday seems to be election day. The partisan is just everywhere and the Dem's are no less guilty about it. It does not matter what the issue is, it is to continue trying to make anything Obama does as bad government.

Despite a reasonable history of being a melting pot (tossed salad still in some areas) with tolerance to new comers we still go through spells where a vocal group can still unilaterally hate whole classes of people based upon religions, skin color, country, or political preferences.
 
Bunky said:
Despite a reasonable history of being a melting pot (tossed salad still in some areas) with tolerance to new comers we still go through spells where a vocal group can still unilaterally hate whole classes of people based upon religions, skin color, country, or political preferences.
Click to expand...

You don't gotta tell me. I'm a white guy. Live in Alabama. Drive a 4x4. I'm automatically a racist. I do keep my hood ironed and pointy, though. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top