Taxes, fiscal conservativism & governance

[Wry Catcher]

"In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes"
B. Franklin

Understanding Supply-Side Economics

A starting point, the link above gives an overview of Reaganomics.

Another view: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/pdf/ess_keynesiantheory.pdf

Both are short overviews of two conflicting economic theories; both suggest a method to end our economic malaise.

(* * *) TBC

 

[Wry Catcher]

(***) TBC, To Be Continued.

The dissonance between the two theories is worthy of debate. It amazes me that those who hold Reaganomics as dear don't understand the basic ideas of supply side economic theory.
Putting Reagonomics into practice at this time and in our economy will be a huge mistake. I suspect even the Republican leadership understands the government needs to do more.
My fear is if the R's return to power, the one sure way to jump start our economy is war.
I hope I'm wrong, but if the R's return to power the drums of war will begin a steady beat, fear and hate will return to the airways, no longer directed at Obama, but at Ahmadinejad, and the R's will commit other peoples kids in harms way.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Hello, no comments, even by the usual echo chamber? I guess, the post is too highbrow.

 

[Zander]

THREAD FAIL

 

[Wry Catcher]

THREAD FAIL

Yes it did, the only response from a stupid asshole. I knew posting on an issue which deserves honest debate would chase away the smarter members of the echo chamber. Getting a response from you is embarrassing.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Thankfully Obama and the Dems will leave the 2012 Republican President and Congress no other choice but to start closing down Depression era programs and departments.

We had Stimulus and we have a government that's grown over 20% since the Marxists took control and just like they did in the New Deal they continue to strangle the economy.

Progressivism need to be treated like small pox and be eradicated from the planet

 

[Wry Catcher]

Thankfully Obama and the Dems will leave the 2012 Republican President and Congress no other choice but to start closing down Depression era programs and departments.

We had Stimulus and we have a government that's grown over 20% since the Marxists took control and just like they did in the New Deal they continue to strangle the economy.

Progressivism need to be treated like small pox and be eradicated from the planet

Please CF, I moved you from the top five stupidest RW Fringers down to the top ten. Don't go for number one.
Read the links and think, you're ideology didn't work and will hurt American.
[maybe you don't care, I do].

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Thankfully Obama and the Dems will leave the 2012 Republican President and Congress no other choice but to start closing down Depression era programs and departments.

We had Stimulus and we have a government that's grown over 20% since the Marxists took control and just like they did in the New Deal they continue to strangle the economy.

Progressivism need to be treated like small pox and be eradicated from the planet

Please CF, I moved you from the top five stupidest RW Fringers down to the top ten. Don't go for number one.
Read the links and think, you're ideology didn't work and will hurt American.
[maybe you don't care, I do].

You want me to bring out the FDR unemployment series again so you can show me where unfettered Keynesian economics actually worked? Been there, done that, epic fail.

And especially now you should have read up on Harding and Coolidge and how tax cuts and lowered spending help the private sector grow.

We have stimulus, we have a government that grown 20% and we still have 9.6% unemployment.

Epic Fail, your time is up. You lose Congress in 2010 and Allah willing in 2012 you lose another 75-100 seats ,the Presidency and the right to have dead people vote.

 

[Revere]

Here is what the statist lie holds for Americans. France, fast forward:

Sarkozy stands firm as pension protests escalate - Europe, World - The Independent

 

[Wry Catcher]

Thanks for sharing CF (you've made it back to the top five).

 

[Old Rocks]

And then we have Zander's self portrait.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Investopedia explains Reaganomics
The term was used by supporters and detractors of Reagan's policies alike. Reaganomics was partially based on the principles of supply-side economics and the trickle-down theory. These theories hold the view that decreases in taxes, especially for corporations, is the best way to stimulate economic growth: the idea is that if the expenses of corporations are reduced, the savings will "trickle down" to the rest of the economy, spurring growth.

Prior to becoming Reagan's Vice President, George H. Bush coined the term "voodoo economics" as a proposed synonym for Reaganomics.

Still waiting for that "trickle down" promise. How about you?

 

[Revere]

Trickle down is not gifts for anyone who wants them.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Investopedia explains Reaganomics
The term was used by supporters and detractors of Reagan's policies alike. Reaganomics was partially based on the principles of supply-side economics and the trickle-down theory. These theories hold the view that decreases in taxes, especially for corporations, is the best way to stimulate economic growth: the idea is that if the expenses of corporations are reduced, the savings will "trickle down" to the rest of the economy, spurring growth.

Prior to becoming Reagan's Vice President, George H. Bush coined the term "voodoo economics" as a proposed synonym for Reaganomics.

Still waiting for that "trickle down" promise. How about you?

Your fundamental economic illiteracy is not my problem.

Go check where the US economy was when Reagan entered the WH and where it was when he left, then get back to me. The datas been posted billions of times but you seem impervious to it

 

[MaggieMae]

THREAD FAIL

Now we're treated to a photograph of your bullshit.

 

[MaggieMae]

"In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes"
B. Franklin

Understanding Supply-Side Economics

A starting point, the link above gives an overview of Reaganomics.

Another view: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/pdf/ess_keynesiantheory.pdf

Both are short overviews of two conflicting economic theories; both suggest a method to end our economic malaise.

(* * *) TBC

Here's another timely article that I found intriguing. While I suppose Eisenhower would be considered a rino by today's conservatives, his kind of Republicanism is the only one that works for a nation this huge and diverse.

...Dwight D. Eisenhower, had been quite happy with a top income tax rate on millionaires of 91 percent. As he wrote to his brother Edgar Eisenhower in a personal letter on November 8, 1954:

"[T]o attain any success it is quite clear that the Federal government cannot avoid or escape responsibilities which the mass of the people firmly believe should be undertaken by it. The political processes of our country are such that if a rule of reason is not applied in this effort, we will lose everything--even to a possible and drastic change in the Constitution. This is what I mean by my constant insistence upon 'moderation' in government.

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt [you possibly know his background], a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."

Goldwater, however, rejected the "liberalism" of Eisenhower, Rockefeller, and other "moderates" within his own party. Extremism in defense of liberty was no vice, he famously told the 1964 nominating convention, and moderation was no virtue. And it doomed him and his party.

Full article here, including discussion on the failure of "supply side economics."

Two Santa Clauses or How The Republican Party Has Conned America for Thirty Years | CommonDreams.org

 

[Wry Catcher]

Understanding supply-side economics:

Understanding Supply-Side Economics

aka: Voodoo Economcs

What is Voodoo Economics?

Sorry Frank, repeating the same lies over and over is silly, the evidence speaks loudly you are (be generous now Wry) a, uh, hmmmm, mistaken.

 

[MaggieMae]

Here is what the statist lie holds for Americans. France, fast forward:

Sarkozy stands firm as pension protests escalate - Europe, World - The Independent

So France is making changes in its own pension security funds. So what? Nobody argues that our own Social Security System needs to be reevaluated in order to remain liquid, which will probably mean younger generations won't have the same benefits. Nothing new there. Only time will tell if there's rioting in our own streets over it. But I do believe that people like you are just itching for some riots to start happening. In other words, you prefer to remain part of the problem instead of part of the solution.

 

[Revere]

Social security is a lie.

 

[MaggieMae]

Investopedia explains Reaganomics
The term was used by supporters and detractors of Reagan's policies alike. Reaganomics was partially based on the principles of supply-side economics and the trickle-down theory. These theories hold the view that decreases in taxes, especially for corporations, is the best way to stimulate economic growth: the idea is that if the expenses of corporations are reduced, the savings will "trickle down" to the rest of the economy, spurring growth.

Prior to becoming Reagan's Vice President, George H. Bush coined the term "voodoo economics" as a proposed synonym for Reaganomics.

Still waiting for that "trickle down" promise. How about you?

Your fundamental economic illiteracy is not my problem.

Go check where the US economy was when Reagan entered the WH and where it was when he left, then get back to me. The datas been posted billions of times but you seem impervious to it

Reagan's economic policy was based on an ideology that didn't work.

BW Online | June 21, 2004 | The Real Economic Legacy Of Ronald Reagan

Inevitably, the measure of Reagan's legacy of the '80s must be taken against what followed: the Clinton years of the '90s. Reagan became President when America was economically sclerotic. His tax changes, combined with a tight monetary policy, helped to make the country competitive again. The price paid, however, was a soaring budget deficit. Reagan and his supply-side advisers believed that big tax cuts would pay for themselves by generating higher tax revenues through greater economic growth. It never happened.

President Clinton took office in 1993, when those huge budget deficits weighed heavily on the markets and the economy. Clinton's turn away from liberal spending to balancing the budget (the "Rubinomics" policy of his Treasury Secretary, Robert E. Rubin) brought confidence back to the markets. When telecom and the Internet took off three years later, the economy ignited.

Yet despite different fiscal policies, the macroeconomic outcomes were remarkably similar. Under Reagan, lower taxes and a soaring budget deficit produced a growth rate of 3.4%. Under Bill Clinton, higher taxes and a budget surplus generated growth of 3.6%. Throughout both Presidencies, from 1982 to 2000, interest rates fell and the stock market roared. So much for ideology.