Q for USMB Progressives

[Cammmpbell]

Okay, sure... You typed all that data from memory. You copied it from some favorite Thom Hartmann hack style site or previous document you created, added commentary (which looks remarkably like other stuff I've seen before) and it's still the same nonsense it was back then.

This Reagan is satan crap doesn't fly here.

Reagan took over with the total national debt less than $1 trillion. He cut taxes for the wealthy. I remember the political ad which showed a millionaire able to buy a Mercedes with the savings and my wife and I saved about $8 a month. The most weighted tax cuts in the country's history. Add to that the fact that tax deductions such as car loans, personal loans, regular bank loans......anything except home mortgages were taken away from the middle class of America. In other words while he was funding high dollar tax cuts for the wealthy with borrowed money he began to damage ordinary working America. Hell....you didn't think this mess happened over night did you. Trickle Down was that warm piss running down a working American's back.

By the time he and George Herbert Walker Bush finished their three term spending spree the national debt had quadrupled. Same way with George W. Bush. He took over a balanced annual budget with surpluses projected all the way to the outyears, cut taxes twice, 2001 and 2003 and doubled the debt again.

You can deny it all you want to but it's the truth and it's recorded for all time in the records. I don't blame you for being ashamed of the son-of-a-bitch. His memory problems were already in the forefront before he ever left office. The last couple of years he was in the white house Nancy's astrologist made the big decisions.

 

[DiamondDave]

Utter unsubstantiated claims and myopic bullshit...

 

[8537]

We have the number 1 economy on the planet and got here in a relatively short time by adhering to free markets.

My question: Why do you think Redistribution is a better deal?

oh gawd.

When was this period of "adhering to free markets" that got us to the "number 1 economy on the planet"?

The industrial revolution - when our money was backed by gold.

Lol.

(1) I don't think we want to point to the industrial revolution as a period marking the benefits of unbridled free markets.

(2) We didn't become the "number 1 economy in the world" until half a century or more after the industrial revolution.

(3) the gold standard didn't get us there.

 

[Steelplate]

The industrial revolution - when our money was backed by gold.

oh, you mean when workers were little more than slaves? Gotcha...

Bullshit....

Did employers abuse employees? yes that has happened, however you make it sound like it was common and it wasn't..

The funny part is that I can surely list more examples of abuse er exploitation of labor than you can and you're the one making bold accusations.

Really? Do tell. Tell me how the Rockefellers and the Carnegies and the Morgans were these excellent employers. Tell me how the Coal Miners in Pennsylvania and West Virginia all lived such excellent lives. Tell me how those textile mills were just havens of happiness... You have no fuckin' clue...You're too damned spoiled and young.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Utter unsubstantiated claims and myopic bullshit...

Says the guy without any evidence. OK.

 

[DiamondDave]

Utter unsubstantiated claims and myopic bullshit...

Says the guy without any evidence. OK.

When addressing a post and poster who throws out crap like "The last couple of years he was in the white house Nancy's astrologist made the big decisions. ", you really don't need a lot of meat to post

 

[G.T.]

Utter unsubstantiated claims and myopic bullshit...

Says the guy without any evidence. OK.

When addressing a post and poster who throws out crap like "The last couple of years he was in the white house Nancy's astrologist made the big decisions. ", you really don't need a lot of meat to post

uuuuuuhuhuhuhuh....huhuhuhuhu....he said "meat"

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

We have the number 1 economy on the planet and got here in a relatively short time by adhering to free markets.

My question: Why do you think Redistribution is a better deal?

Let's think about this for just a minute. During the last 60 years, tax rates have been higher than they are now. We are now in the middle of the longest economic downturn since the Great Depression. If it weren't for all the government programs supporting those out of work, this would be Great Depression II.

In truth we got here, creating the largest economy in the world, with higher tax rates and even greater redistribution of income than we now have. And now that we have taken a step backwards by letting everyone keep more of their money, now our economy has tanked. Now, the truth is that it has very little to do with redistribution of wealth. However, paying for government programs without going into debt to do so, has created wealth over the years. Government spending money on this project and that, has put money into the private sector. Granted, first that money was taken out of the private sector, but then it was actually put to good use.

The problem with letting everyone keep more, and this holds the most truth with the very wealthy, is that the money does not end up back in the economy. It is held off to the side and left to do nothing. And this has been proven out by the fact that US businesses are sitting on over $2 trillion in cash that they refuse to put back into play. Now just think what would happen if half of that money was put into government revenue and then put back into the economy where it was actually in play. There would be more money floating around, people would be spending more, and companies would have to start hiring again to meet demand. You see, demand is what drives the economy. Investors do not invest unless there is demand, and since all the money is being hoarded and kept out of play, there is no growth.

Now there are other ways to put that money back into play, however none of them are realistic. For example, American businesses could give everyone of their employees a big raise, or they could just hire more people to get people working. Problem with that is that they won't do it if the demand is not there in the first place.

There's all you need to know.

 

[Cammmpbell]

Utter unsubstantiated claims and myopic bullshit...

I told you guys to stop the bullshit:

Reagan took over with the total national debt less than $1 trillion. He cut taxes for the wealthy. I remember the political ad which showed a millionaire able to buy a Mercedes with the savings and my wife and I saved about $8 a month. The most weighted tax cuts in the country's history. Add to that the fact that tax deductions such as car loans, personal loans, regular bank loans......anything except home mortgages were taken away from the middle class of America. In other words while he was funding high dollar tax cuts for the wealthy with borrowed money he began to damage ordinary working America. Hell....you didn't think this mess happened over night did you. Trickle Down was that warm piss running down a working American's back.

By the time he and George Herbert Walker Bush finished their three term spending spree the national debt had quadrupled. Same way with George W. Bush. He took over a balanced annual budget with surpluses projected all the way to the outyears, cut taxes twice, 2001 and 2003 and doubled the debt again.

You can deny it all you want to but it's the truth and it's recorded for all time in the records. I don't blame you for being ashamed of the son-of-a-bitch. His memory problems were already in the forefront before he ever left office. The last couple of years he was in the white house Nancy's astrologist made the big decisions.

 

[auditor0007]

We have the number 1 economy on the planet and got here in a relatively short time by adhering to free markets.

My question: Why do you think Redistribution is a better deal?

Let's think about this for just a minute. During the last 60 years, tax rates have been higher than they are now. We are now in the middle of the longest economic downturn since the Great Depression. If it weren't for all the government programs supporting those out of work, this would be Great Depression II.

In truth we got here, creating the largest economy in the world, with higher tax rates and even greater redistribution of income than we now have. And now that we have taken a step backwards by letting everyone keep more of their money, now our economy has tanked. Now, the truth is that it has very little to do with redistribution of wealth. However, paying for government programs without going into debt to do so, has created wealth over the years. Government spending money on this project and that, has put money into the private sector. Granted, first that money was taken out of the private sector, but then it was actually put to good use.

The problem with letting everyone keep more, and this holds the most truth with the very wealthy, is that the money does not end up back in the economy. It is held off to the side and left to do nothing. And this has been proven out by the fact that US businesses are sitting on over $2 trillion in cash that they refuse to put back into play. Now just think what would happen if half of that money was put into government revenue and then put back into the economy where it was actually in play. There would be more money floating around, people would be spending more, and companies would have to start hiring again to meet demand. You see, demand is what drives the economy. Investors do not invest unless there is demand, and since all the money is being hoarded and kept out of play, there is no growth.

Now there are other ways to put that money back into play, however none of them are realistic. For example, American businesses could give everyone of their employees a big raise, or they could just hire more people to get people working. Problem with that is that they won't do it if the demand is not there in the first place.

If the government had the $2T they would spend it in 6 months and it would be gone for good with no return on it. Your economic philosophy has failed so badly that even Communists flee from it in horror.

Actually, it has proven to work quite well over the last sixty years. It wasn't until we cut taxes to the point that it reduced revenues to the lowest levels in over sixty years that everything went down the shitter.

I'll make it really simple for you. We have the worst economy in 60 years, and we have the lowest tax rates in 60 years. Guess what? They are related.

 

[editec]

We have the number 1 economy on the planet and got here in a relatively short time by adhering to free markets.

You ignorance is tripping you up again, Cru.

The USA followed a policy of STRICT PROTECTIONISM until the Mid 20th century.


FYI, that is tyhe exactly opposite of the FREE MARKET you imagine this nation had.


You really do need to read your history, Cru.

The propagandists you trust are making you look like a god damned know-nothing.

 

[8537]

has Frank or anyone else come back to tell us when this period of "adhering to free markets" happened?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

has Frank or anyone else come back to tell us when this period of "adhering to free markets" happened?

We were never pure Capitalist Free Market, but we were more so than any other nation.

How is redistribution better for you?

 

[Cammmpbell]

has Frank or anyone else come back to tell us when this period of "adhering to free markets" happened?

We were never pure Capitalist Free Market, but we were more so than any other nation.

How is redistribution better for you?

Redistribution would never be necessary if the politicians didn't start unnecessary wars and maintain a defense department the likes of which has never been in the history of mankind. Dwight Eisenhower warned this nation about that 50 years ago:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY]Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex. - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Mr.Nick]

has Frank or anyone else come back to tell us when this period of "adhering to free markets" happened?

We were never pure Capitalist Free Market, but we were more so than any other nation.

How is redistribution better for you?

Redistribution would never be necessary if the politicians didn't start unnecessary wars and maintain a defense department the likes of which has never been in the history of mankind. Dwight Eisenhower warned this nation about that 50 years ago:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY]Eisenhower warns us of the military industrial complex. - YouTube[/ame]

So wars create redistribution of wealth to the general public?

 

[G.T.]

has Frank or anyone else come back to tell us when this period of "adhering to free markets" happened?

We were never pure Capitalist Free Market, but we were more so than any other nation.

How is redistribution better for you?

How are lower taxes working out for you, currently?

 

[NYcarbineer]

We have the number 1 economy on the planet and got here in a relatively short time by adhering to free markets.

My question: Why do you think Redistribution is a better deal?

Because a middle class/working class couple trying to raise a family ought not have to have 2 jobs in order to do so.

 

[Full-Auto]

We have the number 1 economy on the planet and got here in a relatively short time by adhering to free markets.

My question: Why do you think Redistribution is a better deal?

Because a middle class/working class couple trying to raise a family ought not have to have 2 jobs in order to do so.

Thats been the case since before Reagen. Have you enjoyed your SS being redistributed to cronies?

 

[Cammmpbell]

We have the number 1 economy on the planet and got here in a relatively short time by adhering to free markets.

My question: Why do you think Redistribution is a better deal?

Because a middle class/working class couple trying to raise a family ought not have to have 2 jobs in order to do so.

I live in Roane County, TN. People around here are looking for anything to do for $8 or $10 an hour. People with hundreds of thousands in 401k's or IRA's cannot relate to that. They never have and they never will.

 

[8537]

has Frank or anyone else come back to tell us when this period of "adhering to free markets" happened?

We were never pure Capitalist Free Market, but we were more so than any other nation.

How is redistribution better for you?

Can you tell us the approximate dates you are referring to here, Frank? Which decades?