John F. Kennedy...Address to the Economic Club of New York

Discussion in 'Politics' started by beretta304, Oct 12, 2012.

  1. beretta304
    Offline

    beretta304 BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Messages:
    8,664
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    A Saner Place
    Ratings:
    +73
    Listen to the speech. Sound more like Romney or Obama. Don't just read the excerpt here? You won't get the full message.



    American Rhetoric: John F. Kennedy - Address to the Economic Club of New York

    The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system — and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes to be enacted and become effective in 1963.


    I'm not talking about a "quickie" or a temporary tax cut, which would be more appropriate if a recession were imminent. Nor am I talking about giving the economy a mere shot in the arm, to ease some temporary complaint. I am talking about the accumulated evidence of the last five years that our present tax system, developed as it was, in good part, during World War II to restrain growth, exerts too heavy a drag on growth in peace time; that it siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power; that it reduces the financial incenitives [sic] for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking. In short, to increase demand and lift the economy, the federal government's most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases in public expenditures, but to expand the incentives and opportunities for private expenditures.

    Under these circumstances, any new tax legislation — and you can understand that under the comity which exists in the United States Constitution whereby the Ways and Means Committee in the House of Representatives have the responsibility of initiating this legislation, that the details of any proposal should wait on the meeting of the Congress in January. But you can understand that, under these circumstances, in general, that any new tax legislation enacted next year should meet the following three tests:
    First, it should reduce the net taxes by a sufficiently early date and a sufficiently large amount to do the job required. Early action could give us extra leverage, added results, and important insurance against recession. Too large a tax cut, of course, could result in inflation and insufficient future revenues — but the greater danger is a tax cut too little, or too late, to be effective.

    Second, the new tax bill must increase private consumption, as well as investment. Consumers are still spending between 92 and 94 percent on their after-tax income, as they have every year since 1950. But that after-tax income could and should be greater, providing stronger markets for the products of American industry. When consumers purchase more goods, plants use more of their capacity, men are hired instead of laid-off, investment increases, and profits are high.

    Corporate tax rates must also be cut to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital. The government has already taken major steps this year to reduce business tax liability and to stimulate the modernization, replacement, and expansion of our productive plant and equipment. We have done this through the 1962 investment tax credit and through the liberalization of depreciation allowances — two essential parts of our first step in tax revision — which amounted to a ten percent reduction in corporate income taxes worth 2.5 billion dollars. Now we need to increase consumer demand to make these measures fully effective — demand which will make more use of existing capacity and thus increase both profits and the incentive to invest. In fact, profits after taxes would be at least 15 percent higher today if we were operating at full employment.

    For all these reasons, next year's tax bill should reduce personal as well as corporate income taxes: for those in the lower brackets, who are certain to spend their additional take-home pay, and for those in the middle and upper brackets, who can thereby be encouraged to undertake additional efforts and enabled to invest more capital.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2012
  2. SniperFire
    Offline

    SniperFire Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2012
    Messages:
    13,627
    Thanks Received:
    1,219
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Inside Your Head
    Ratings:
    +1,223
    JFK was the first Neoconservative POTUS.
     
  3. beretta304
    Offline

    beretta304 BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Messages:
    8,664
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    A Saner Place
    Ratings:
    +73
    If you listen to the whole thing you would be hearing Romney not the Socialist in Chief that hijacked the Democrat Party.

    His tax policy is aligned with what Romney is advocating.

    And I don't even like the Kennedys as some found out this morning on another thread.
     
  4. beretta304
    Offline

    beretta304 BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Messages:
    8,664
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    A Saner Place
    Ratings:
    +73

    I like the proverb by the way.
     
  5. edthecynic
    Offline

    edthecynic Censored for Cynicism

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    26,655
    Thanks Received:
    3,085
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,724
    Funny how the CON$ervoFascist Brotherhood never quotes this part!

    "Surely the lesson of the last decade is that budget deficits are not caused by wild-eyed spenders"
     
  6. beretta304
    Offline

    beretta304 BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Messages:
    8,664
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    A Saner Place
    Ratings:
    +73

    EddietheDeflector is here. :clap2: Do you ever address DIRECTLY what a thread is about or do you always do what you did twice when discussing the BLS? Remember how you twice changed the intent of threads from the actual numbers to endless posts about retirees? Talk about annoying.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2012
  7. edthecynic
    Offline

    edthecynic Censored for Cynicism

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    26,655
    Thanks Received:
    3,085
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,724
    Obviously I struck a nerve, the line is directly from the speech you cite and link to. How exactly is that a deflection???
     
  8. beretta304
    Offline

    beretta304 BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    Messages:
    8,664
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    A Saner Place
    Ratings:
    +73

    I asked who it sounded like and the comparison to the two people running. You pick one line and run with your "neo, Conservo, whatever" bullshit. 99.9 % of it is more in line with Romney's policies. Don't even reply. I'm not wasting any time on you. You do the same thing to every thread. Have a nice evening.:eusa_hand:
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2012
  9. edthecynic
    Offline

    edthecynic Censored for Cynicism

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    26,655
    Thanks Received:
    3,085
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,724
    That part I quoted does not sound like any Republican running for office, and neither does this quote, "Too large a tax cut, of course, could result in inflation and insufficient future revenues"

    I think Kennedy would think a tax cut to the levels we have today would be "too large" as our deficits have proven, so therefore Willard's additional 20% would be overkill!
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2012
  10. iamwhatiseem
    Offline

    iamwhatiseem Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    14,832
    Thanks Received:
    3,114
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +6,127
    China just this year began to out-produce the United States.
     

Share This Page