Zone1 Tax the Rich! Make them Pay their Fair Share!

[Toddsterpatriot]

EASY ONE THERE




1981 F/Y - Carter's last year - 19.1% GDP revenues


1982- Reagan FIRST YEAR 18.6%
1983- Reagan 17%
1984- Reagan 16.9%
1985- Reagan 17.2%
1986- Reagan 17%
1987- Reagan 17.9%
1988- Reagan 17.7% (Cut taxes from top rate of 50% the US had since LBJ, to 28%, LARGEST TAX CUT FOR THE RICH TO DATE)
1989- Reagan 17.8%



US DEBT TO GDP IN January 1981 was 31%



U.S. federal debt-to-GDP ratio at the end of fiscal year 1989 (September 30, 1989) was approximately 39% . Debt had increased from under $1 trillion to over $2.86 trillion in Ronnie final F/Y



Ronnie,- DAMN, TRIPLING US DEBT (though increasing it ONLY 31% of GDP to 39% of GDP, is pretty good, compared to Dubya/Dementia Donnie


Let's bypass that serial tax increaser, Poppy Bush for now and go to the best conservative Prez since Ike, BJ Bill

• Total Federal Debt (1993): ~$4.351 trillion (at fiscal end).
• Debt-to-GDP Ratio (1993): ~64.0%.

Wait, was Poppy a secret proliferate spender?


"During George H.W. Bush’s presidency (1989–1993), the U.S. national debt rose by approximately $1.55 trillion, representing a 54% increase over his four-year term. He inherited a large deficit from the Reagan administration and faced a struggling economy, which, along with the savings and loan bailout, contributed to this rapid debt growth."


Oh right that "great economy the Gipper "built"



All right BJ Bill Clinton takes over the US and debt to GDP was 64%



Poppy had 17% of GDP in revenues his final F/Y (1993) October 1, 1992 to September 30, 1993


1994- Clinton first year - 17.5% GDP revenues
1995- Clinton 17.9%
1996- Clinton 18.3%
1997- Clinton 18.7%
1998- Clinton 19.3% (First Clinton BUDGET surplus)
1999- Clinton 19.3% (Second Clinton surplus)
2000- Clinton 20% (Third Clinton surplus)
2001- Clinton 18.9% (Fourth Clinton surplus)
How did BJ BILL CLINTON, take US from

• Debt-to-GDP Ratio (1993): ~64.0%. TO JUST 54.7% IN F/Y 2001

DAMN


LINKS HERE

GOP Budget Busting 101​

Thread 'GOP Budget Busting 101'

Monday at 5:45 PM

OK People let's get to the topic of debt, how we got here ($39+ trillion) and how GOP policy vs Democratic policies influenced it.

If you don't want to bring actual facts or data, just stand off



From 1945 to 1980 the US debt to GDP was shrinking. Measuring the debt via GDP accounts for population growth and inflation, and it's how every credible economist or nation measures revenues and expenses



US debt to GDP ABOUT 119% IN 1945, THE HIGHEST EVER TO THAT TIME


US DEBT TO GDP IN 1980 was 31%

What were we hearing from the GOP at that time? Let's take a ;look at Ronnie...

• JonKoch
• Replies: 21
• Forum: Economy

• 
• 

EASY ONE THERE

Easy? Where did Reagan's revenues go down in your post?

Ronnie,- DAMN, TRIPLING US DEBT

I know, beating the Evil Empire....just awful!

Let's bypass that serial tax increaser, Poppy Bush

It's true, he fukked up by going along with the Dems tax hikes.

 

[JonKoch]

Right, they "earned over $1 million" before "large tax deductions, tax credits, lower tax rates on some kinds of income, or business losses".

Like I said, IN 2011 THERE WERE 1,100+ FAMILIES WHO EARNED $1+ MILLION AND PAID ZERO TAXES

Reports indicate Donald Trump paid no federal income tax in 10 of 15 years starting in 2000, and only $750 in 2016/2017, by utilizing massive business losses


As a billionaire, his, The Guardian notes tax avoidance is largely legal, leveraging tax code loopholes for real estate developers.

 

[JonKoch]

That's some rebuttal, Jon. It is also a circumvention violation of the banned word rule on this board. Grow up.

 

[Alweysrite!]

Great idea if you change the fact that the top 1% of earners receive more than the bottom 60% in tax breaks and grants.

Top Content on LinkedIn

Explore top LinkedIn content from members on a range of professional topics.

www.linkedin.com

The top earners are the reason we have a high standard of living in this country

 

[Concerned American]

Still haven't grown up yet, eh junior. Keep digging troll.

 

[JonKoch]

EASY ONE THERE

Easy? Where did Reagan's revenues go down in your post?

Ronnie,- DAMN, TRIPLING US DEBT

I know, beating the Evil Empire....just awful!

Let's bypass that serial tax increaser, Poppy Bush

It's true, he fukked up by going along with the Dems tax hikes.

ECONOMISTS MEASURE REVENUES (AND SPENDING) VIA GDP TO ACCOUNT FOR POP GROWTH, ECONOMY GROWTH, INFLATION, ETC


1981 F/Y - Carter's last year - 19.1% GDP revenues


1982- Reagan FIRST YEAR 18.6%
1983- Reagan 17%
1984- Reagan 16.9%
1985- Reagan 17.2%
1986- Reagan 17%
1987- Reagan 17.9%
1988- Reagan 17.7% (Cut taxes from top rate of 50% the US had since LBJ, to 28%, LARGEST TAX CUT FOR THE RICH TO DATE)
1989- Reagan 17.8%


IT WASN'T UNTIL CLINTON THE US GOT BACK TO CARTER RATES


Federal Budget Receipts and Outlays

Federal Budget Receipts and Outlays: | The American Presidency Project

www.presidency.ucsb.edu

 

[JonKoch]

EASY ONE THERE

Easy? Where did Reagan's revenues go down in your post?

Ronnie,- DAMN, TRIPLING US DEBT

I know, beating the Evil Empire....just awful!

Let's bypass that serial tax increaser, Poppy Bush

It's true, he fukked up by going along with the Dems tax hikes.

Sure, that was Ronnie, not 9 successive US administrations or even the failed "communism" it was Ronnie


The "Reagan Myth" suggests he solely won the Cold War through "peace through strength," ignoring complex internal Soviet collapse and collaborative diplomacy, often misrepresenting the roles of Gorbachev and successor George H.W. Bush. While Reagan’s 1980s buildup (NSDD 32/75) aimed to "roll back" Soviet influence, historical analysis indicates the Soviet collapse was heavily driven by internal failure, with Bush navigating the final transition.

 

[JonKoch]

The top earners are the reason we have a high standard of living in this country

Yeah, we didn't have any top earners 1945-1980 when the top 1% received 8%-10% of the pie, it wasn't until they starting going for the 20%+ (like 26% in 2024) that had top earners in AmeriKKKa

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Like I said, IN 2011 THERE WERE 1,100+ FAMILIES WHO EARNED $1+ MILLION AND PAID ZERO TAXES

Reports indicate Donald Trump paid no federal income tax in 10 of 15 years starting in 2000, and only $750 in 2016/2017, by utilizing massive business losses


As a billionaire, his, The Guardian notes tax avoidance is largely legal, leveraging tax code loopholes for real estate developers.

If you earned $1 million and had $1 million in losses, you earned zero.

How much tax should you pay on zero?

 

[sparky]

AmeriKKKa

Abbie Hoffman is gone Jon

It's AMERICA

thanks

~S~

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

ECONOMISTS MEASURE REVENUES (AND SPENDING) VIA GDP TO ACCOUNT FOR POP GROWTH, ECONOMY GROWTH, INFLATION, ETC


1981 F/Y - Carter's last year - 19.1% GDP revenues


1982- Reagan FIRST YEAR 18.6%
1983- Reagan 17%
1984- Reagan 16.9%
1985- Reagan 17.2%
1986- Reagan 17%
1987- Reagan 17.9%
1988- Reagan 17.7% (Cut taxes from top rate of 50% the US had since LBJ, to 28%, LARGEST TAX CUT FOR THE RICH TO DATE)
1989- Reagan 17.8%


IT WASN'T UNTIL CLINTON THE US GOT BACK TO CARTER RATES


Federal Budget Receipts and Outlays

Federal Budget Receipts and Outlays: | The American Presidency Project

www.presidency.ucsb.edu

Revenue is paid in dollars, not percentages. Revenue didn't decrease, did it?

It's true, by indexing tax brackets for inflation, Reagan collected less than he could have.

IT WASN'T UNTIL CLINTON THE US GOT BACK TO CARTER RATES

Carter's bracket creep was awesome. So was Clinton's internet bubble.

 

[leftwinger]

Got it, you are ignorant as ****


"(President Barack Obama gave) half a billion in taxpayer money to help his friends at Solyndra, a business the White House knew was on the path to bankruptcy."

In 2006 (DUBYA), the U.S. Department of Energy invited the company to apply for a new loan guarantee program, a program created with the support of a majority of Republicans, who controlled Congress at the time.

The company's December 2006 pre-application was enough to vault it into a group of 16 applicants invited to submit full applications in 2007. By early January 2009, Solyndra's file had been reviewed by the department's credit committee and returned with a request for further analysis. On Jan. 15,2009 (DUBYA) the loan program office said "due diligence" for the Solyndra loan was scheduled to be complete by March 2009. The money was going to build a gleaming new factory in Fremont, Calif.



As recently as 2010, the company was hailed as a Silicon Valley superstar, ranked a top clean-tech company by the Wall Street Journal and one of the "World's 50 Most Innovative Companies" by a Massachusetts Institute of Technology magazine.

Solyndra ad claims President Barack Obama gave taxpayer money to help his campaign donors at failed solar company

A new TV ad airing in Florida and other states portrays President Barack Obama as a politician who showered millions of

www.politifact.com

Solydra? Lol! Gutted and sold off after taking the money, donating back and selling assets at a loss. I worked in the valley cheese dic. I saw the building along 880 or 680 in Milpitas.p SHUP. They never produced much of anything but Obiden smoke and mirrors. A giant $250B money laundering pit at the NE tip of Silicon Valley. Back when $1B was big deal

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Sure, that was Ronnie, not 9 successive US administrations or even the failed "communism" it was Ronnie


The "Reagan Myth" suggests he solely won the Cold War through "peace through strength," ignoring complex internal Soviet collapse and collaborative diplomacy, often misrepresenting the roles of Gorbachev and successor George H.W. Bush. While Reagan’s 1980s buildup (NSDD 32/75) aimed to "roll back" Soviet influence, historical analysis indicates the Soviet collapse was heavily driven by internal failure, with Bush navigating the final transition.

Sure, that was Ronnie, not 9 successive US administrations or even the failed "communism" it was Ronnie

It wasn't Carter, when the Russians invaded Afghanistan, was it?

The "Reagan Myth" suggests he solely won the Cold War through "peace through strength," ignoring complex internal Soviet collapse

It's true, by showing the Soviets they couldn't keep up with our massive GDP growth and military spending during Reagan's presidency, as well as working with the Saudis to crush Soviet oil revenues plus supporting the opposition to the Soviets in Central America and Eastern Europe, Reagan kept up the pressure on the Soviets' crappy economy.

often misrepresenting the roles of Gorbachev

Poor Gorby, once he allowed a trickle of freedom, his people stopped believing the commie myth.

 

[JonKoch]

If you earned $1 million and had $1 million in losses, you earned zero.

How much tax should you pay on zero?

Yeah, Dementia Donnie was poor. No private jets or anything right?

Sorry write offs can easily be a tax dodge. Be honest

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, Dementia Donnie was poor. No private jets or anything right?

Sorry write offs can easily be a tax dodge. Be honest

Who said he was poor?

Yes, write offs reduce taxable income. Obviously.

 

[JonKoch]

Revenue is paid in dollars, not percentages. Revenue didn't decrease, did it?

It's true, by indexing tax brackets for inflation, Reagan collected less than he could have.

IT WASN'T UNTIL CLINTON THE US GOT BACK TO CARTER RATES

Carter's bracket creep was awesome. So was Clinton's internet bubble.

Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible," Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves

Bush-Appointed Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke: "I Don't Think That As A General Rule Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Treasury Secretary Paulson: "As A General Rule, I Don't Believe That Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Bush OMB Director Nussle: "Some Say That [The Tax Cut] Was A Total Loss. Some Say They Totally Pay For Themselves. It's Neither Extreme."


Bush CEA Chairman Lazear: "As A General Rule, We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Economic Adviser Viard: "Federal Revenue Is Lower Today Than It Would Have Been Without The Tax Cuts."


Bush Treasury Official Carroll: "We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Reagan Chief Economist Feldstein: "It's Not That You Get More Revenue By Lowering Tax Rates, It Is That You Don't Lose As Much."

Feldstein In 1986: "Hyperbole" That Reagan Tax Cut "Would Actually Increase Tax Revenue."

Conservative Economist Holtz-Eakin: "No Serious Research Evidence" Suggests Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


"My colleagues and I have been very appreciative of your [President Clinton's] support of the Fed over the years, and your commitment to fiscal discipline has been instrumental in achieving what in a few weeks will be the longest economic expansion in the nation's history."

— Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve Board Chairman, January 4, 2000, with President Clinton at Chairman Greenspan's re-nomination announcement



"The deficit has come down, and I give the Clinton Administration and President Clinton himself a lot of credit for that. [He] did something about it, fast. And I think we are seeing some benefits."

— Paul Volcker, Federal Reserve Board Chairman (1979-1987), in Audacity, Fall 1994




One of the reasons Goldman Sachs cites for the "best economy ever" is that "on the policy side, trade, fiscal, and monetary policies have been excellent, working in ways that have facilitated growth without inflation. The Clinton Administration has worked to liberalize trade and has used any revenue windfalls to reduce the federal budget deficit." — Goldman Sachs, March 1998




"Clinton's 1993 budget cuts, which reduced projected red ink by more than $400 billion over five years, sparked a major drop in interest rates that helped boost investment in all the equipment and systems that brought forth the New Age economy of technological innovation and rising productivity."


— Business Week, May 19, 1997

 

[JonKoch]

Revenue is paid in dollars, not percentages. Revenue didn't decrease, did it?

It's true, by indexing tax brackets for inflation, Reagan collected less than he could have.

IT WASN'T UNTIL CLINTON THE US GOT BACK TO CARTER RATES

Carter's bracket creep was awesome. So was Clinton's internet bubble.

Only if you don't like math did they increase, according to EVERY credible economist

Reagan's tax cuts, primarily the 1981 Economic Recovery Tax Act, reduced federal revenue by an estimated 2.9% of GDP

Tax Cuts Don't Pay For Themselves | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

While policymakers are gearing up to address tax reform this fall, some have advocated for abandoning true reform and instead focusing solely on tax cuts.

www.crfb.org

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible," Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves

Bush-Appointed Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke: "I Don't Think That As A General Rule Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Treasury Secretary Paulson: "As A General Rule, I Don't Believe That Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Bush OMB Director Nussle: "Some Say That [The Tax Cut] Was A Total Loss. Some Say They Totally Pay For Themselves. It's Neither Extreme."


Bush CEA Chairman Lazear: "As A General Rule, We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Economic Adviser Viard: "Federal Revenue Is Lower Today Than It Would Have Been Without The Tax Cuts."


Bush Treasury Official Carroll: "We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Reagan Chief Economist Feldstein: "It's Not That You Get More Revenue By Lowering Tax Rates, It Is That You Don't Lose As Much."

Feldstein In 1986: "Hyperbole" That Reagan Tax Cut "Would Actually Increase Tax Revenue."

Conservative Economist Holtz-Eakin: "No Serious Research Evidence" Suggests Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


"My colleagues and I have been very appreciative of your [President Clinton's] support of the Fed over the years, and your commitment to fiscal discipline has been instrumental in achieving what in a few weeks will be the longest economic expansion in the nation's history."

— Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve Board Chairman, January 4, 2000, with President Clinton at Chairman Greenspan's re-nomination announcement



"The deficit has come down, and I give the Clinton Administration and President Clinton himself a lot of credit for that. [He] did something about it, fast. And I think we are seeing some benefits."

— Paul Volcker, Federal Reserve Board Chairman (1979-1987), in Audacity, Fall 1994




One of the reasons Goldman Sachs cites for the "best economy ever" is that "on the policy side, trade, fiscal, and monetary policies have been excellent, working in ways that have facilitated growth without inflation. The Clinton Administration has worked to liberalize trade and has used any revenue windfalls to reduce the federal budget deficit." — Goldman Sachs, March 1998




"Clinton's 1993 budget cuts, which reduced projected red ink by more than $400 billion over five years, sparked a major drop in interest rates that helped boost investment in all the equipment and systems that brought forth the New Age economy of technological innovation and rising productivity."


— Business Week, May 19, 1997

Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible,"

And yet, after Reagan cut the top rate from 70% to 50%, revenues increased.

And yet, after Reagan cut the top rate from 50% to 28%, revenues increased.

Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves

What was the capital gains rate? How much revenue was collected?

What was the new, lower capital gains rate? How much revenue was collected?

Bush-Appointed Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke: "I Don't Think That As A General Rule Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Who decided they have to pay for themselves?

If tax rates go from 40% to 30% (a 25% reduction) and revenues go from $100 billion to $90 billion, is that a failure? DURR

Bush Economic Adviser Viard: "Federal Revenue Is Lower Today Than It Would Have Been Without The Tax Cuts."
Taxpayer after tax income is higher than it would have been without the tax cuts.
Which is actually much more important.

One of the reasons Goldman Sachs cites for the "best economy ever" is that "on the policy side, trade, fiscal, and monetary policies have been excellent, working in ways that have facilitated growth without inflation. The Clinton Administration has worked to liberalize trade and has used any revenue windfalls to reduce the federal budget deficit." — Goldman Sachs, March 1998

Newt didn't let Clinton spend like he wanted to and the Internet Bubble was awesome!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Only if you don't like math did they increase, according to EVERY credible economist

Reagan's tax cuts, primarily the 1981 Economic Recovery Tax Act, reduced federal revenue by an estimated 2.9% of GDP

Tax Cuts Don't Pay For Themselves | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

While policymakers are gearing up to address tax reform this fall, some have advocated for abandoning true reform and instead focusing solely on tax cuts.

www.crfb.org

View attachment 1241464

People got to keep a larger percentage of the GDP?

Stop convincing me Reagan's tax cuts were awesome!!!!

 

[JonKoch]

Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible,"

And yet, after Reagan cut the top rate from 70% to 50%, revenues increased.

And yet, after Reagan cut the top rate from 50% to 28%, revenues increased.

Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves

What was the capital gains rate? How much revenue was collected?

What was the new, lower capital gains rate? How much revenue was collected?

Bush-Appointed Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke: "I Don't Think That As A General Rule Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Who decided they have to pay for themselves?

If tax rates go from 40% to 30% (a 25% reduction) and revenues go from $100 billion to $90 billion, is that a failure? DURR

Bush Economic Adviser Viard: "Federal Revenue Is Lower Today Than It Would Have Been Without The Tax Cuts."
Taxpayer after tax income is higher than it would have been without the tax cuts.
Which is actually much more important.

One of the reasons Goldman Sachs cites for the "best economy ever" is that "on the policy side, trade, fiscal, and monetary policies have been excellent, working in ways that have facilitated growth without inflation. The Clinton Administration has worked to liberalize trade and has used any revenue windfalls to reduce the federal budget deficit." — Goldman Sachs, March 1998

Newt didn't let Clinton spend like he wanted to and the Internet Bubble was awesome!

THERE HASN'T BEEN A TAX CUT SINCE LBJ THAT BROUGHT IN MORE REVENUES THAN IF THEY WERE LEFT ALONE, VOODOO ECONOMICS


President Reagan's 1981 Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA) cut the top individual marginal tax rate from 70% to 50%. While total federal tax revenues increased in nominal dollars over the course of his presidency, studies indicate the initial 1981 cuts did not pay for themselves and contributed to higher federal deficits.



The 1981 cuts significantly reduced federal revenue. Estimates show that the cuts lowered revenue by about 9% in the first few years.

What we learned from Reagan's tax cuts | Brookings

David Wessel looks at what happened at Ronald Reagan cut tax rates in the '80s.

www.brookings.edu

NEWT? LOL

The Real Heroes of the 1998 Budget Surplus: Clinton and His Economy​

....Notice that legislation crafted by the GOP-led Congress had no net impact whatsoever on the 1998 balanced budget. But that isn’t quite fair. There were several bills passed by Gingrich’s Congress that did impact the budget projections for 1998. It’s just that—and pay attention to this next part— their combined effect was to increase the deficit that year.


Congress passed and Clinton signed a bill to reform the welfare system in late 1996.

That fall, Congress also passed a few other policy changes that had fiscal impacts. All together, these changes spurred CBO to lower its 1998 deficit projection by about $14 billion.


The following year Congress passed the so-called “Balanced Budget Act of 1997,” which is the very bill to which Newt Gingrich points when he tries to claim credit for 1998’s surplus. But the facts get in the way of Gingrich’s nice story.

Not So Fast, Newt

Newt Gingrich would love to claim credit for the 1998 budget surplus, but the facts show he had nothing to do with it, writes Michael Linden.

www.americanprogress.org