Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Clinton raised taxes in 1993. Prosperity AND deficit reduction followed.
Again, you are moving the goal posts. You're making a correlation between tax rates and "prosperity and deficit reduction" which have nothing to do with tax revenues from the tax rates. All kinds of things go into the economy and deficit/surplus regarding budgets. We're talking specifically about the tax rates and the collected tax revenues from those tax rates.
Every time in modern history, and you can go all the way back to Coolidge... when we reduce the top marginal tax rates we realize an increase in tax revenue. That is a FACT. It's an indisputable FACT. That's why you are forced to change topics and talk about debts and deficits instead of the tax revenues.
You can fool really stupid people with this, you aren't fooling ME!
Clinton then proved that when you RAISE the top marginal tax rate you increase revenues.
LBJ got a big increase in revenues by putting a TAX SURCHARGE on the income tax to pay for the Vietnam War.
The top rate cut from GW Bush tax cuts was allowed to expire in 2014, meaning the rate went up,
and we've had increased revenues every year since.
BUT REVENUES DID INCREASE under GWB with the TAX cuts and you can't ignore these FACTS!
AND PLEASE tell me where Budget deficits declined EVEN with more tax revenue under Obama?
AND remember TARP made up the BIG chunk of deficit from GWB...BUT and you uninformed people never understood this:
TARP has been paid back under Obama with a profit of $72 billion and Obama STILL had tremendous deficits having added in spite of TARP pay back
over $9 trillion to the national debt!
Also remember Obama holds the dubious distinction of having the LOWEST percent of growth of the Gross Domestic Product of ANY president!
Obama May Become First President Since Hoover Not to See 3% GDP Growth
President Barack Obama may become the first president since Herbert Hoover not to serve during a year in which the growth in real GDP was at least 3 percent.
Obama May Become First President Since Hoover Not to See 3% GDP Growth
Wonder why???
Because Obama wanted 1,400 companies to go out of business thus reducing tax revenues by $100 billion a year!
Obama wanted utility companies to go bankrupt and gas prices to climb. Obama wanted the USA to be energy DEPENDENT on foreign oil.
All documented statements from Obama that the GDP might have grown more under Obama if he were less anti-business!
View attachment 117434
lets cut military spending not boost it....active military spending should be cut while vets should get all the benefits promised....ie...fast and good health care...lets cut trumps spending...his trips to fl are pricey...the cost of maintaining trump towers is costly...and how much of that goes to trump...by the backdoor?
Too bad the Donald has to get all penurious with the least among us, especially after going all out for military spending. Many seniors who voted for him, including a lot of vets he claims he honors, use the meals on wheels. Doesn't mean I'm ready to switch back to voting for those in the islamofascist demorat party anytime soon though.
Clinton raised taxes in 1993. Prosperity AND deficit reduction followed.
Again, you are moving the goal posts. You're making a correlation between tax rates and "prosperity and deficit reduction" which have nothing to do with tax revenues from the tax rates. All kinds of things go into the economy and deficit/surplus regarding budgets. We're talking specifically about the tax rates and the collected tax revenues from those tax rates.
Every time in modern history, and you can go all the way back to Coolidge... when we reduce the top marginal tax rates we realize an increase in tax revenue. That is a FACT. It's an indisputable FACT. That's why you are forced to change topics and talk about debts and deficits instead of the tax revenues.
You can fool really stupid people with this, you aren't fooling ME!
Clinton then proved that when you RAISE the top marginal tax rate you increase revenues.
LBJ got a big increase in revenues by putting a TAX SURCHARGE on the income tax to pay for the Vietnam War.
The top rate cut from GW Bush tax cuts was allowed to expire in 2014, meaning the rate went up,
and we've had increased revenues every year since.
Then why did Clinton say this and after he said it CLINTON LOWERED TAXES!!!
"It might surprise you to know that I think I raised them too much, too."
However, with his masterful 1995 flip-flop on taxes, President Clinton took the first step toward a successful campaign for re-election and a shift in policy that produced the economic boom that occurred during his second term.
The boom was on. Between the end of 1996 and the end of 2000:
- Welfare reform, which he signed in the summer of 1996, led to a massive reduction in the effective tax rates on the poor by ameliorating the rapid phase out of benefits associated with going to work.
- The phased reduction in tariff and non-tariff barriers between the U.S., Mexico and Canada under the North American Free Trade Agreement continued, leading to increased trade.
- In 1997, Clinton signed a reduction in the (audible liberal gasp) capital gains tax rate to 20% from 28%.
- The 1997 tax cuts also included a phased in increase in the death tax exemption to $1 million from $600,000, and established Roth IRAs and increased the limits for deductible IRAs.
- Annual growth in federal spending was kept to below 3%, or $57 billion.
- The Clinton Administration also maintained its policy of a strong and stable dollar. Over his entire second term, consumer price inflation averaged only 2.4% a year.
The Dangerous Myth About The Bill Clinton Tax Increase
- Economic growth accelerated a full percentage point to 4.2% a year.
- Employment growth nudged higher, to 2.1 million jobs per year as the unemployment rate fell to 4.0% from 5.4%.
- As the tax rate on capital gains came down, real wages made their biggest advance since the implementation of the Reagan tax rate reductions in the mid 1980s. Real average hourly earnings were (in 1982 dollars) $7.43 in 1996, $7.55 in 1997, $7.75 in 1998, $7.86 in 1999, and $7.89 in 2000.
- Millions of Americans shared in the prosperity as the value of their 401(k)s climbed along with the stock market, which saw the price of the S&P 500 index rise 78%.
- Revenue growth accelerated an astounding 59%, increasing on average $143 billion a year. Combined with continued restraint on government spending, that produced a $198 billion budget surplus in 2000.
LOL, so which is it?
Clinton gets credit for the economic boom of the late nineties,
or Clinton gets no credit because that 'boom' was just the infamous dot com bubble.
Which of those RW'er stories are we supposed to believe?
/---- You mean like the Kennedy boys you idolize? You mean like that?H-rump - why does Trump want to punish the people who sacrificed/paid their dues/did their part, to make America great
Because he's an elitist privileged dickbag who's had everything just handed to him for nothing all his life and has never had to work for jack squat. Therefore the concept of actually working for or struggling for something is a complete blank to him. He's never even held a job before. Never had to assume responsibility for anything, and when it would be proper to do so he bails out.
.
lets cut military spending not boost it....active military spending should be cut while vets should get all the benefits promised....ie...fast and good health care...lets cut trumps spending...his trips to fl are pricey...the cost of maintaining trump towers is costly...and how much of that goes to trump...by the backdoor?
I have the impression that trump is TAKING care not to profit MONETARILY
from his position-------NOTHING LIKE da Clintons OR SELF DESIGNATED
"SAINT" jimmuh carter
How many threads will there be on this fake news?
The cuts won't have much of an affect on Meals on Wheels. Are you libs really that stupid or are you just running with whatever the fake news channels offer up each day?
According to Meals on Wheels 2015 Financial Statement out of the $7.5 million in funding they got that year only $248,347 of the funding or a little over three precent came from the government.
lets cut military spending not boost it....active military spending should be cut while vets should get all the benefits promised....ie...fast and good health care...lets cut trumps spending...his trips to fl are pricey...the cost of maintaining trump towers is costly...and how much of that goes to trump...by the backdoor?
Feel free to look it up if you doubt it not going to bother with the partisan bullshit part of your post.According to Meals on Wheels 2015 Financial Statement out of the $7.5 million in funding they got that year only $248,347 of the funding or a little over three precent came from the government.
If that's true it is even more proof that conservatives are the biggest group of heartless petty fucks on the planet.
According to Meals on Wheels 2015 Financial Statement out of the $7.5 million in funding they got that year only $248,347 of the funding or a little over three precent came from the government.
lets cut military spending not boost it....active military spending should be cut while vets should get all the benefits promised....ie...fast and good health care...lets cut trumps spending...his trips to fl are pricey...the cost of maintaining trump towers is costly...and how much of that goes to trump...by the backdoor?
I have the impression that trump is TAKING care not to profit MONETARILY
from his position-------NOTHING LIKE da Clintons OR SELF DESIGNATED
"SAINT" jimmuh carter
Link?
I have no issue with cutting some of the fat from the military budget I have said that many times. So how about finally admitting this cutting money from Meals on Wheels story is overhyped partisan BS?According to Meals on Wheels 2015 Financial Statement out of the $7.5 million in funding they got that year only $248,347 of the funding or a little over three precent came from the government.
So how about then instead of 54 BILLION for needless escalations of the bloated defense budget,
we at least lower that 54 BILLION by 1/200,000ths, put the Meals on Wheels money back in, and call it even?
H-rump - why does Trump want to punish the people who sacrificed/paid their dues/did their part, to make America great
Because he's an elitist privileged dickbag who's had everything just handed to him for nothing all his life and has never had to work for jack squat. Therefore the concept of actually working for or struggling for something is a complete blank to him. He's never even held a job before. Never had to assume responsibility for anything, and when it would be proper to do so he bails out.
and why does Trump want to punish people in the geographic area (South) that gave him the most support in the presidential election... is trump stupid or just an asshole?
Both.
I do not think that Trump is an elitist. His mother was a Scottish lassie.
(not to impugn the scots) Scottish homemakers know how to be THRIFTY
by CUTTING CORNERS. Home support for the elderly and disabled is
not a corner that should be disturbed. Trump is on a corner cutting ROLL. He should entertain himself by walking around the white house at night, turning
unnecessary lights off. ( I do it in my little apartment ) He should learn how
to darn his own socks
Nope... they are certainly NOT related. Again, Reagan cut top marginal tax rates dramatically and INCREASED tax revenues by 75%. From $517 billion to $909 billion in constant 2009 dollars. This is public record from the Treasury Dept.
He did indeed broaden the tax base.
asswipe.....Meals On Wheels is a problem......too much of the money isn't going to feed the poor.....and why is it you can't crack open your wallet and feed the guy....?
Because he lives 750 FUCKING MILES AWAY, Dipweed.
Fuck you and the hackery you rode in on.
Wow......you mean you have to send gold coins by convoy in order to give him money asswipe....you can't cut him a fucking check and send it in the mail?
LOL, so which is it?
Clinton gets credit for the economic boom of the late nineties,
or Clinton gets no credit because that 'boom' was just the infamous dot com bubble.
Which of those RW'er stories are we supposed to believe?
