John F. Kennedy - radical wing-nut teabagger

[P@triot]

All the evidence you need to illustrate how the dumbocrat party has been completely and totally hijacked by unhinged socialists, marxists, and communists.

If someone today suggests tax cuts because it's proven to correct a struggling economy, you're now attacked as a "wing-nut teabagger" by radicals right out of Atlas Shrugged (scary just how much Ayn Rand's novel has come to fruition). Yet here is the party's ultimate "golden boy" clearly stating this fact!

JFK: The Case For Tax Cuts : Paul Williams : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

 

[NYcarbineer]

If the Kennedy tax rates were so great, why aren't conservatives like you arguing to put them back?

 

[P@triot]

If the Kennedy tax rates were so great, why aren't conservatives like you arguing to put them back?

As usual, you're not making any sense. When did I say I like Kennedy's taxes? I simply pointed out how Kennedy is on record stating that cutting taxes is one of the best ways to turn around a bad economy - and that people who say that today are attacked relentlessly as being "radical", "wing-nut", and a "teabagger" by dumbocrats.

It's just concrete evidence that the entire dumbocrat party has been hijacked by the most radical socialists, marxists, communists, etc. The actual liberal (ie the rational liberal) is the extreme minority in this fucked up party.

 

[DiamondDave]

If the Kennedy tax rates were so great, why aren't conservatives like you arguing to put them back?

Perhaps you should also look at (once again) what was deemed income, what was deductible, etc... or just look at the effective tax rate...

What next?? Another call for the "90% rate"?

 

[JakeStarkey]

So JFK is a teabagger and RR is a Democrat. Rott's world is upside down.

 

[aaronleland]

So JFK is a teabagger and RR is a Democrat. Rott's world is upside down.

Is this the same world where the Soviet Union was allied with Nazi Germany during WW2?

 

[crussmith2]

The notion of Kennedy as supply-side forerunner is a powerful myth, but it is a myth. Context is key. Conservatives love to quote a speech Kennedy gave at the Economic Club of New York in December 1962. Here's one quote—I've italicized the crucial part often left out: "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 incentives for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking." JFK was not expounding an implacable economic philosophy; he was speaking about a very specific circumstance. The top marginal tax rate was 91 percent, which JFK wanted reduced to a "more sensible" 65 percent. Compare that with today's 35 percent top rate, and ask: If supply-siders are so enamored of JFK's tax policies, would they advocate a return to a "more sensible" 65 percent top rate? Applying Kennedy's tax talk to the current structure, JFK biographer Robert Dallek says, is like comparing "apples and watermelons."...
Kennedy's economic policies were rooted in a Keynesian belief in the stimulative effects of budget deficits. While FDR and his aides had embraced countercyclical deficits as necessary in times of recession or depression, Kennedy was the first to advocate planned deficits in a time of neither war nor economic emergency. The aim was for the tax cuts to stimulate demand, driving the economy from the bottom up.
Robert Shlessinger
in US News
The Myth of JFK as Supply Side Tax Cutter

 

[whitehall]

Imagine telling a bunch of liberal democrats "ask not what your Country can do for you".

 

[DiamondDave]

The notion of Kennedy as supply-side forerunner is a powerful myth, but it is a myth. Context is key. Conservatives love to quote a speech Kennedy gave at the Economic Club of New York in December 1962. Here's one quote—I've italicized the crucial part often left out: "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 incentives for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking." JFK was not expounding an implacable economic philosophy; he was speaking about a very specific circumstance. The top marginal tax rate was 91 percent, which JFK wanted reduced to a "more sensible" 65 percent. Compare that with today's 35 percent top rate, and ask: If supply-siders are so enamored of JFK's tax policies, would they advocate a return to a "more sensible" 65 percent top rate? Applying Kennedy's tax talk to the current structure, JFK biographer Robert Dallek says, is like comparing "apples and watermelons."...
Kennedy's economic policies were rooted in a Keynesian belief in the stimulative effects of budget deficits. While FDR and his aides had embraced countercyclical deficits as necessary in times of recession or depression, Kennedy was the first to advocate planned deficits in a time of neither war nor economic emergency. The aim was for the tax cuts to stimulate demand, driving the economy from the bottom up.
Robert Shlessinger
in US News
The Myth of JFK as Supply Side Tax Cutter

Another left winger with an opinion piece as proof or fact.. LOL

Lest we have to tell another one about what was considered income, what was able to be deducted, and what the effective tax rate really was...

Incredible.. they breed on this board like fucking rabbits

 

[P@triot]

The notion of Kennedy as supply-side forerunner is a powerful myth, but it is a myth. Context is key. Conservatives love to quote a speech Kennedy gave at the Economic Club of New York in December 1962. Here's one quote—I've italicized the crucial part often left out: "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 incentives for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking." JFK was not expounding an implacable economic philosophy; he was speaking about a very specific circumstance. The top marginal tax rate was 91 percent, which JFK wanted reduced to a "more sensible" 65 percent. Compare that with today's 35 percent top rate, and ask: If supply-siders are so enamored of JFK's tax policies, would they advocate a return to a "more sensible" 65 percent top rate? Applying Kennedy's tax talk to the current structure, JFK biographer Robert Dallek says, is like comparing "apples and watermelons."...
Kennedy's economic policies were rooted in a Keynesian belief in the stimulative effects of budget deficits. While FDR and his aides had embraced countercyclical deficits as necessary in times of recession or depression, Kennedy was the first to advocate planned deficits in a time of neither war nor economic emergency. The aim was for the tax cuts to stimulate demand, driving the economy from the bottom up.
Robert Shlessinger
in US News
The Myth of JFK as Supply Side Tax Cutter

1.) Good post

2.) Still doesn't hold up when you consider the official narrative of today's radical dumbocrat. According to them, reducing taxes does NOT help solve an economic crisis. So whether the tax rate was 91% or 9.1%, it's irrelevant to the conversation. The point is, it's a fact that lowering taxes and leaving more money in the hands of the people is always better - and even JFK recognized it.

 

[P@triot]

Imagine telling a bunch of liberal democrats "ask not what your Country can do for you".

I've asked the dumbocrats on this board that very question many times (they never have an answer).

The modern day "liberal" (actually communist) only asks "what will you do for me today, because I'm an entitled asshole and you owe me"....

 

[Lakhota]

Did Kennedy cut taxes after starting two unfunded wars off-budget?

 

[NYcarbineer]

If the Kennedy tax rates were so great, why aren't conservatives like you arguing to put them back?

As usual, you're not making any sense. When did I say I like Kennedy's taxes? I simply pointed out how Kennedy is on record stating that cutting taxes is one of the best ways to turn around a bad economy - and that people who say that today are attacked relentlessly as being "radical", "wing-nut", and a "teabagger" by dumbocrats.

It's just concrete evidence that the entire dumbocrat party has been hijacked by the most radical socialists, marxists, communists, etc. The actual liberal (ie the rational liberal) is the extreme minority in this fucked up party.

You can't repeatedly lower taxes every time you think the economy needs a boost because eventually you end up with taxes at zero.

 

[Obamanation]

If the Kennedy tax rates were so great, why aren't conservatives like you arguing to put them back?

As usual, you're not making any sense. When did I say I like Kennedy's taxes? I simply pointed out how Kennedy is on record stating that cutting taxes is one of the best ways to turn around a bad economy - and that people who say that today are attacked relentlessly as being "radical", "wing-nut", and a "teabagger" by dumbocrats.

It's just concrete evidence that the entire dumbocrat party has been hijacked by the most radical socialists, marxists, communists, etc. The actual liberal (ie the rational liberal) is the extreme minority in this fucked up party.

You can't repeatedly lower taxes every time you think the economy needs a boost because eventually you end up with taxes at zero.

...but spending more money you DON'T HAVE can be done anytime you like!! RIGHT?

 

[Bfgrn]

If the Kennedy tax rates were so great, why aren't conservatives like you arguing to put them back?

As usual, you're not making any sense. When did I say I like Kennedy's taxes? I simply pointed out how Kennedy is on record stating that cutting taxes is one of the best ways to turn around a bad economy - and that people who say that today are attacked relentlessly as being "radical", "wing-nut", and a "teabagger" by dumbocrats.

It's just concrete evidence that the entire dumbocrat party has been hijacked by the most radical socialists, marxists, communists, etc. The actual liberal (ie the rational liberal) is the extreme minority in this fucked up party.

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

JFK did not believe in trickle down economics.

JFK, the demand-side tax cutter

"The Revenue Act of 1964 was aimed at the demand, rather than the supply, side of the economy," said Arthur Okun, one of Kennedy's economic advisers.

This distinction, taught in Economics 101, seldom makes it into the Washington sound-bite wars. A demand-side cut rests on the Keynesian theory that public consumption spurs economic activity. Government puts money in people's hands, as a temporary measure, so that they'll spend it. A supply-side cut sees business investment as the key to growth. Government gives money to businesses and wealthy individuals to invest, ultimately benefiting all Americans. Back in the early 1960s, tax cutting was as contentious as it is today, but it was liberal demand-siders who were calling for the cuts and generating the controversy.

When Kennedy ran for president in 1960 amid a sluggish economy, he vowed to "get the country moving again." After his election, his advisers, led by chief economist Walter Heller, urged a classically Keynesian solution: running a deficit to stimulate growth. (The $10 billion deficit Heller recommended, bold at the time, seems laughably small by today's standards.) In Keynesian theory, a tax cut aimed at consumers would have a "multiplier" effect, since each dollar that a taxpayer spent would go to another taxpayer, who would in effect spend it again—meaning the deficit would be short-lived.

At first Kennedy balked at Heller's Keynesianism. He even proposed a balanced budget in his first State of the Union address. But Heller and his team won over the president. By mid-1962 Kennedy had seen the Keynesian light, and in January 1963 he declared that "the enactment this year of tax reduction and tax reform overshadows all other domestic issues in this Congress."

The plan Kennedy's team drafted had many elements, including the closing of loopholes (the "tax reform" Kennedy spoke of).Ultimately, in the form that Lyndon Johnson signed into law, it reduced tax withholding rates, initiated a new standard deduction, and boosted the top deduction for child care expenses, among other provisions. It did lower the top tax bracket significantly, although from a vastly higher starting point than anything we've seen in recent years: 91 percent on marginal income greater than $400,000. And he cut it only to 70 percent, hardly the mark of a future Club for Growth member.

 

[auditor0007]

If the Kennedy tax rates were so great, why aren't conservatives like you arguing to put them back?

As usual, you're not making any sense. When did I say I like Kennedy's taxes? I simply pointed out how Kennedy is on record stating that cutting taxes is one of the best ways to turn around a bad economy - and that people who say that today are attacked relentlessly as being "radical", "wing-nut", and a "teabagger" by dumbocrats.

It's just concrete evidence that the entire dumbocrat party has been hijacked by the most radical socialists, marxists, communists, etc. The actual liberal (ie the rational liberal) is the extreme minority in this fucked up party.

The top tax rate was 91%. Of course it was too high and cutting it was going to spur the economy. The problem is you guys think this works regardless of the starting point, and it does not. If it did, we could legitimately cut taxes to a rate of zero percent, and it would grow the economy. The problem is the government would then collect zero percent of a massive economy, which would equate to zero dollars.

We can't just keep cutting taxes and expect it to lead to greater tax revenues. We've seen how this has not worked out well at all.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

All the evidence you need to illustrate how the dumbocrat party has been completely and totally hijacked by unhinged socialists, marxists, and communists.

If someone today suggests tax cuts because it's proven to correct a struggling economy, you're now attacked as a "wing-nut teabagger" by radicals right out of Atlas Shrugged (scary just how much Ayn Rand's novel has come to fruition). Yet here is the party's ultimate "golden boy" clearly stating this fact!

JFK: The Case For Tax Cuts : Paul Williams : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

If Kennedy was alive and running for president he would never be elected or at least he would not be a democrat
He was very pro second amendment.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

 

[Obamanation]

Jus' watch'em try!!!

 

[JakeStarkey]

So JFK is a teabagger and RR is a Democrat. Rott's world is upside down.

Is this the same world where the Soviet Union was allied with Nazi Germany during WW2?

The USSR and Nazi Germany had a non-aggression pact from August 1939 to June 1941.

This allowed the two powers to divide and conquer Poland, while freeing Germany's eastern flank so that it could concentrate on the West.