Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 102
Thanks Tree63Thanks

Thread: Fox News guest storms off show after host refuses to accept simple tax math

  1. #71
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    61,795
    Thanks
    4041

    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    So JFK had his tax cuts and looked what happened
    As you so astutely point out, Kennedy's tax cut was a success, so let's go back to those rates.[/QUOTE]


    Why when we have record revenue now?

    https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...illion-deficit

  2. #72
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    61,795
    Thanks
    4041

    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    You say some pretty goofy things, but that has got to take the cake.

    Then you ignore how he paid back the unions and other people that gave him millions

  3. #73
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    61,795
    Thanks
    4041

    Quote Originally Posted by namvet69 View Post
    Another lie. The US corporate tax rate appears high on paper but in reality (you know, the place where we democrats live) the rate works out to below 20% and many corps pay nothing at all.

    So, we are already competitive with the rest of the world. It should be evident even to a trump voter that we've had record Corporate profits and a stock market that has risen for many years.

    These Tax cuts to the rich are not only unneeded but are going to be harmful in the long run, say 3 years out, especially to us middle income folks. But that's nothing new because that is right out of the GOP playbook.

    Give breaks to the super wealthy, call it a middle class bill and then make those middle class pay the tab.

    And, If I could I'd bet anything that the GOP will come after SS V.A. and Medicare/Medicaid once this bill passes, heaven forbid. Don't believe me? Watch.
    More democrat BS to ignore the tax rate is 35% the highest in the world

  4. #74
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    61,795
    Thanks
    4041

    Quote Originally Posted by namvet69 View Post
    The democrats lied to Reagan and kept spending. The economy soared after Reagan tax cuts and stopped the Carter recession
    Can't you read a chart? GDP went up a staggering one tenth of one percent LOL and tanked with Bush the father who called it voodoo econ. He was right.

    Then Clinton raised taxes and the economy soared after which Bush the Moron son gave big tax cuts favoring corporations and the wealthy and it tanked again.

    And we all know what Obama was faced with with two wars on the card and no revenue because of the Bush cuts. Then we start to climb out of that mess in spite of all that and he gives us healthcare. The GOP trashes the idea in ads all over the media and public opinion buys the lies and puts the crooks in charge of congress. And then of course the economy stagnates because of low revenue again because of tax cuts. That's what the chart says and that's what history says. It reflects truth. But you don't like truth do you?[/QUOTE]

    Keep believing that

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics

    Reagan significantly increased public expenditures, primarily the Department of Defense, which rose (in constant 2000 dollars) from $267.1 billion in 1980 (4.9% of GDP and 22.7% of public expenditure) to $393.1 billion in 1988 (5.8% of GDP and 27.3% of public expenditure); most of those years military spending was about 6% of GDP, exceeding this number in 4 different years. Those numbers had not been seen since the end of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War in 1973.[20] In 1981, Reagan significantly reduced the maximum tax rate, which affected the highest income earners, and lowered the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 50%; in 1986 he further reduced the rate to 28%.[21] The federal deficit under Reagan peaked at 6% of GDP in 1983, falling to 3.2% of GDP in 1987[22] and to 3.1% of GDP in his final budget.[23] The inflation-adjusted rate of growth in federal spending fell from 4% under Jimmy Carter to 2.5% under Ronald Reagan; however, federal deficit as percent of GDP was up throughout the Reagan presidency from 2.7% at the end of (and throughout) the Carter administration.[2][23] As a short-run strategy to reduce inflation and lower nominal interest rates, the U.S. borrowed both domestically and abroad to cover the Federal budget deficits, raising the national debt from $997 billion to $2.85 trillion.[3] This led to the U.S. moving from the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation.[4] Reagan described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency.[24]

    According to William A. Niskanen, one of the architects of Reaganomics, "Reagan delivered on each of his four major policy objectives, although not to the extent that he and his supporters had hoped", and notes that the most substantial change was in the tax code, where the top marginal individual income tax rate fell from 70.1% to 28.4%, and there was a "major reversal in the tax treatment of business income", with effect of "reducing the tax bias among types of investment but increasing the average effective tax rate on new investment". Roger Porter, another architect of the program, acknowledges that the program was weakened by the many hands that changed the President's calculus, such as Congress.[2][25] President Reagan raised taxes eleven times over the course of his presidency, all in the name of fiscal responsibility,[26] but the overall tax burden went down during his presidency.[27] According to Paul Krugman, "Over all, the 1982 tax increase undid about a third of the 1981 cut; as a share of GDP, the increase was substantially larger than Mr. Clinton's 1993 tax increase."[11] According to historian and domestic policy adviser Bruce Bartlett, Reagan's tax increases over the course of his presidency took back half of the 1981 tax cut. Though since the Reagan tax reductions, top marginal tax rates have remained lower than at any point in US history since 1931, when the top marginal rate was raised from 25% to 63%.[28]

    Results

  5. #75
    Southern Strategy Liberal OldGaffer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    36,868
    Thanks
    38875

    From
    Nashville, TN
    Here is a Republican on trickle down:


  6. #76
    quichierbichen
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    61,294
    Thanks
    33152

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Here you go.

    Sorry Democrats. You’re wrong.
    I showed you last week how income inequality rose to extremes in 1929 and then fell to its lowest point into 1975-1978. And how it has risen to extremes again, which is why it’s such a political hot potato right now.

    It’s clear that technological innovations and other economic drivers trickle down to the average Joe. It’s just hard to see because it doesn’t happen quickly. It takes decades!

    The top 10% peaked in 1928, taking home a whopping 49.3% of the income! The bottom 90% had to fight over the remaining 50.7%.

    But, they began to gain modestly in the early 1930s, while that top 10% saw its share of income fall to 32.5% by 1944 (see why I warn that the economic winter season will hit the rich harder than Homer Simpson?).
    Then they enjoyed a sharp rise in income, and the rise of a broad middle class, during World War II.

    From there, they lived in a “golden era” into 1978, with income shares largely between 67% and 68%.

    This happened thanks to trickle-down economics.

    This rise of the middle class came on a long lag from the great innovations of the late 1800s into the Roaring 20s.

    Electricity and telephones emerged around 1900, the Model T in 1907, the all-important assembly line in 1914, and the modern corporation and radios in 1921 (notice the seven-year cycles).

    The rich were moving to the suburbs into the 1920s. But the middle class finally made that massive shift only after WWII.

    This new suburban lifestyle wouldn’t have been possible without electricity, cars, phones and telephones… and then radios and TV to follow. All of those innovations allowed people to enjoy a safer, more spacious and affordable lifestyle and higher wages.
    Like I said: clearly trickle-down economics works.


    https://economyandmarkets.com/econom...-middle-class/
    Your evidence doesn't fit your argument. At all.

  7. #77
    Veteran Member EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    16,613
    Thanks
    8682

    From
    Indiana
    Quote Originally Posted by the watchman View Post
    What's with the bleach blond hair and bimbo dress?

    Oh wait this is Fox News.

  8. #78
    On the Diversary Committe TennesseeRain's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    81,301
    Thanks
    50058

    From
    In the Witness Protection Program
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    Carter like most democrats is an antisemite that was one of our worst presidents in our history
    For the love of dog, would you please learn how to punctuate a goddamned sentence? You're a disgrace.
    Thanks from EnigmaO01

  9. #79
    Shiny Purple Member namvet69's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,490
    Thanks
    3492

    From
    Englewood, Fl
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    More democrat BS to ignore the tax rate is 35% the highest in the world
    No. What is bullshit is the whole trickle down supply-side economics. It has never worked and has always raised the debt. There's no other way to interpret this.

    Demand side stimulus is the only kind that actually boosts tired economies. Put more money in the hands of the working man/woman and it will automatically result in an increase in GDP. Increase demand and the supply side will fill that demand with increased productivity.

    Anything else is bullshit, borrow and spend, voo doo economics. When will you righties wake up to these facts? It's just the way real economics works.

  10. #80
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    61,795
    Thanks
    4041

    Quote Originally Posted by namvet69 View Post
    No. What is bullshit is the whole trickle down supply-side economics. It has never worked and has always raised the debt. There's no other way to interpret this.

    Demand side stimulus is the only kind that actually boosts tired economies. Put more money in the hands of the working man/woman and it will automatically result in an increase in GDP. Increase demand and the supply side will fill that demand with increased productivity.

    Anything else is bullshit, borrow and spend, voo doo economics. When will you righties wake up to these facts? It's just the way real economics works.
    The debt will always go up. Obama almost doubled the debt with no tae cuts or trickle down

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 51
    Last Post: 19th July 2017, 05:42 AM
  2. CNN Guest Uses N-Word on Air - Host is Upset
    By Crusher in forum Current Events
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 25th November 2016, 11:23 AM
  3. Insensitive, Sexist Pig Talk Show Host
    By Babba in forum Current Events
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 4th April 2014, 12:55 PM
  4. Sarah Palin To Co-Host NBC's Today Show
    By boontito in forum Journalism
    Replies: 142
    Last Post: 24th April 2012, 08:28 PM
  5. Mitt Romney, Game Show Host
    By joewebb in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 17th January 2008, 09:31 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed