This explains our current parties pretty well

[sangha]

POINT IS
Didn't hear obama dissagree with him did you?

So what

So what? If it wasn't true or didn't work you would think obama would have said that inaccurate Charlie and give the reaosns why it isn't true, but obama said raising taxes creates equality.

So now you believe Obama even though you have criticized his eco policies?

Could you be any more hypocritica?

You using Obama to support an eco policy is like me using bush* to support my eco policies

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Spoken like someone who doesn't that write-off, credits, deductions, etc are used to determine taxable income. Like I said, once you know your taxable income, all you have to do is look up the rate on a table the IRS supplies. If you can't do that, you are beyond stupid. A child can do it.

You do your taxable income first then you do your tax writeoffs. after that you find out how much taxes you must pay.

Wingnuts think subtracting one # from another is so difficult, they have to hire someone to do it.

Wing nuts as in a muti billion dollars industry.
H& R block doesn't do it for free and isn't the only one doing it.

 

[rdean]

The facts are that lowing taxes does not increase tax revenue and that the wealthy have had far higher tax rates then now and the economy was great.

90+ % was going on in the 50s

Republi CONS have played that "CON" job since Reagan. The whole "trickle down" theory is about as real as their theory of "Magical Creation".

Reagan increased the national debt by 180% with his Reaganomics. From that time to this, Republicans have fielded one tax cut after another. Then look at the trillions in tax cuts under Bush and he left office with an actual zero in jobs growth. From Reagan until today, the economy has about tripled but the national debt has grown by more than 10 times and most of it under Republicans.

We haven't had taxes this low in nearly 80 years. According to Republicans, our economy should "sparkle". And their only solution is "cut taxes". Think about it, the only Republican solution since Reagan is "cut taxes".

Hey, America votes them into office, it must be what they want.

Thread after thread asking what Republicans have done "good" for this country in thirty years and no one can come up with a single thing. I think their only one was "no child left behind" and then they didn't fund it. So does that count?

Merry Christmas.

Charlie Gibson and facts disagree with you.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpSDBu35K-8[/ame]

ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- "How my G.O.P. destroyed the U.S. economy." Yes, that is exactly what David Stockman, President Ronald Reagan's director of the Office of Management and Budget, wrote in a recent New York Times op-ed piece, "Four Deformations of the Apocalypse."

We've arrived at a historic turning point as a nation that no longer needs outside enemies to destroy us, we are committing suicide. Democracy. Capitalism. The American dream. All dying. Why? Because of the economic decisions of the GOP the past 40 years, says this leading Reagan Republican.

Stockman rushes into the ring swinging like a boxer: "If there were such a thing as Chapter 11 for politicians, the Republican push to extend the unaffordable Bush tax cuts would amount to a bankruptcy filing. The nation's public debt ... will soon reach $18 trillion." It screams "out for austerity and sacrifice." But instead, the GOP insists "that the nation's wealthiest taxpayers be spared even a three-percentage-point rate increase."

In the past 40 years Republican ideology has gone from solid principles to hype and slogans. Stockman says: "Republicans used to believe that prosperity depended upon the regular balancing of accounts -- in government, in international trade, on the ledgers of central banks and in the financial affairs of private households and businesses too."



Reagan insider: GOP destroyed economy Paul B. Farrell - MarketWatch

You might consider the words of one of the leading architects of "Reaganomics".

 

[sangha]

You do your taxable income first then you do your tax writeoffs. after that you find out how much taxes you must pay.

Wingnuts think subtracting one # from another is so difficult, they have to hire someone to do it.

Wing nuts as in a muti billion dollars industry.
H& R block doesn't do it for free and isn't the only one doing it.

Wingnuts think H&R does nothing more than subtract tax writeoffs from people's tax bill

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So what

So what? If it wasn't true or didn't work you would think obama would have said that inaccurate Charlie and give the reaosns why it isn't true, but obama said raising taxes creates equality.

So now you believe Obama even though you have criticized his eco policies?

Could you be any more hypocritica?

You using Obama to support an eco policy is like me using bush* to support my eco policies

How incompetant of you I didn't in any way say what you are impling.
I just pointed out that Charlie Gibson said the true abd pointed out the facts, that lowering taxes creates more tax revenue, and obama did not dissagree with him.

 

[sangha]

Republi CONS have played that "CON" job since Reagan. The whole "trickle down" theory is about as real as their theory of "Magical Creation".

Reagan increased the national debt by 180% with his Reaganomics. From that time to this, Republicans have fielded one tax cut after another. Then look at the trillions in tax cuts under Bush and he left office with an actual zero in jobs growth. From Reagan until today, the economy has about tripled but the national debt has grown by more than 10 times and most of it under Republicans.

We haven't had taxes this low in nearly 80 years. According to Republicans, our economy should "sparkle". And their only solution is "cut taxes". Think about it, the only Republican solution since Reagan is "cut taxes".

Hey, America votes them into office, it must be what they want.

Thread after thread asking what Republicans have done "good" for this country in thirty years and no one can come up with a single thing. I think their only one was "no child left behind" and then they didn't fund it. So does that count?

Merry Christmas.

Charlie Gibson and facts disagree with you.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpSDBu35K-8[/ame]

ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- "How my G.O.P. destroyed the U.S. economy." Yes, that is exactly what David Stockman, President Ronald Reagan's director of the Office of Management and Budget, wrote in a recent New York Times op-ed piece, "Four Deformations of the Apocalypse."

We've arrived at a historic turning point as a nation that no longer needs outside enemies to destroy us, we are committing suicide. Democracy. Capitalism. The American dream. All dying. Why? Because of the economic decisions of the GOP the past 40 years, says this leading Reagan Republican.

Stockman rushes into the ring swinging like a boxer: "If there were such a thing as Chapter 11 for politicians, the Republican push to extend the unaffordable Bush tax cuts would amount to a bankruptcy filing. The nation's public debt ... will soon reach $18 trillion." It screams "out for austerity and sacrifice." But instead, the GOP insists "that the nation's wealthiest taxpayers be spared even a three-percentage-point rate increase."

In the past 40 years Republican ideology has gone from solid principles to hype and slogans. Stockman says: "Republicans used to believe that prosperity depended upon the regular balancing of accounts -- in government, in international trade, on the ledgers of central banks and in the financial affairs of private households and businesses too."



Reagan insider: GOP destroyed economy Paul B. Farrell - MarketWatch

You might consider the words of one of the leading architects of "Reaganomics".

Why consider the words of a conservative economist who had a front row seat to the implementation of the policy when you can quote a TV personality

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Wingnuts think subtracting one # from another is so difficult, they have to hire someone to do it.

Wing nuts as in a muti billion dollars industry.
H& R block doesn't do it for free and isn't the only one doing it.

Wingnuts think H&R does nothing more than subtract tax writeoffs from people's tax bill

Everybody is a wingnut asswipe even you.

 

[sangha]

So what? If it wasn't true or didn't work you would think obama would have said that inaccurate Charlie and give the reaosns why it isn't true, but obama said raising taxes creates equality.

So now you believe Obama even though you have criticized his eco policies?

Could you be any more hypocritica?

You using Obama to support an eco policy is like me using bush* to support my eco policies

How incompetant of you I didn't in any way say what you are impling.
I just pointed out that Charlie Gibson said the true abd pointed out the facts, that lowering taxes creates more tax revenue, and obama did not dissagree with him.

Right, you used Obama's agreeing with you to support your argument, even though you think Obama is wrong about economic policy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Republi CONS have played that "CON" job since Reagan. The whole "trickle down" theory is about as real as their theory of "Magical Creation".

Reagan increased the national debt by 180% with his Reaganomics. From that time to this, Republicans have fielded one tax cut after another. Then look at the trillions in tax cuts under Bush and he left office with an actual zero in jobs growth. From Reagan until today, the economy has about tripled but the national debt has grown by more than 10 times and most of it under Republicans.

We haven't had taxes this low in nearly 80 years. According to Republicans, our economy should "sparkle". And their only solution is "cut taxes". Think about it, the only Republican solution since Reagan is "cut taxes".

Hey, America votes them into office, it must be what they want.

Thread after thread asking what Republicans have done "good" for this country in thirty years and no one can come up with a single thing. I think their only one was "no child left behind" and then they didn't fund it. So does that count?

Merry Christmas.

Charlie Gibson and facts disagree with you.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpSDBu35K-8[/ame]

ARROYO GRANDE, Calif. (MarketWatch) -- "How my G.O.P. destroyed the U.S. economy." Yes, that is exactly what David Stockman, President Ronald Reagan's director of the Office of Management and Budget, wrote in a recent New York Times op-ed piece, "Four Deformations of the Apocalypse."

We've arrived at a historic turning point as a nation that no longer needs outside enemies to destroy us, we are committing suicide. Democracy. Capitalism. The American dream. All dying. Why? Because of the economic decisions of the GOP the past 40 years, says this leading Reagan Republican.

Stockman rushes into the ring swinging like a boxer: "If there were such a thing as Chapter 11 for politicians, the Republican push to extend the unaffordable Bush tax cuts would amount to a bankruptcy filing. The nation's public debt ... will soon reach $18 trillion." It screams "out for austerity and sacrifice." But instead, the GOP insists "that the nation's wealthiest taxpayers be spared even a three-percentage-point rate increase."

In the past 40 years Republican ideology has gone from solid principles to hype and slogans. Stockman says: "Republicans used to believe that prosperity depended upon the regular balancing of accounts -- in government, in international trade, on the ledgers of central banks and in the financial affairs of private households and businesses too."



Reagan insider: GOP destroyed economy Paul B. Farrell - MarketWatch

You might consider the words of one of the leading architects of "Reaganomics".

Take it up with Chaelie Gibson and obama
Gibson made the statement, and obama never disagreed with him

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So now you believe Obama even though you have criticized his eco policies?

Could you be any more hypocritica?

You using Obama to support an eco policy is like me using bush* to support my eco policies

How incompetant of you I didn't in any way say what you are impling.
I just pointed out that Charlie Gibson said the true abd pointed out the facts, that lowering taxes creates more tax revenue, and obama did not dissagree with him.

Right, you used Obama's agreeing with you to support your argument, even though you think Obama is wrong about economic policy.

OH so thats how you think you can refute the video? by saying I agree with obama?

If lowering taxes did not create more tax revenue you would think obama would have made that point clear and debunked the comment made by Gibson.
obama didn't do it. So are you saying obama doesn't know how to run an economy?

 

[sangha]

How incompetant of you I didn't in any way say what you are impling.
I just pointed out that Charlie Gibson said the true abd pointed out the facts, that lowering taxes creates more tax revenue, and obama did not dissagree with him.

Right, you used Obama's agreeing with you to support your argument, even though you think Obama is wrong about economic policy.

OH so thats how you think you can refute the video? by saying I agree with obama?

If lowering taxes did not create more tax revenue you would think obama would have made that point clear and debunked the comment made by Gibson.
obama didn't do it.

No, I am pointing out that you DON'T agree with Obama, but you will gladly use him if when he agrees with you (even though he doesn't and even though you disagree with his eco policies)

BTW, lowering taxes DOES result in more tax revenue. It also results in more govt spending (unless you think the govt will spend LESS when it receives more revenue), greater deficits, and increases the national debt

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Right, you used Obama's agreeing with you to support your argument, even though you think Obama is wrong about economic policy.

OH so thats how you think you can refute the video? by saying I agree with obama?

If lowering taxes did not create more tax revenue you would think obama would have made that point clear and debunked the comment made by Gibson.
obama didn't do it.

No, I am pointing out that you DON'T agree with Obama, but you will gladly use him if when he agrees with you (even though he doesn't and even though you disagree with his eco policies)

BTW, lowering taxes DOES result in more tax revenue. It also results in more govt spending (unless you think the govt will spend LESS when it receives more revenue), greater deficits, and increases the national debt

If lowering taxes didn't create more tax revenue you would think ABC would never have allowed him to ask that question.
He even gave examples and time periods.

 

[sangha]

OH so thats how you think you can refute the video? by saying I agree with obama?

If lowering taxes did not create more tax revenue you would think obama would have made that point clear and debunked the comment made by Gibson.
obama didn't do it.

No, I am pointing out that you DON'T agree with Obama, but you will gladly use him if when he agrees with you (even though he doesn't and even though you disagree with his eco policies)

BTW, lowering taxes DOES result in more tax revenue. It also results in more govt spending (unless you think the govt will spend LESS when it receives more revenue), greater deficits, and increases the national debt

If lowering taxes didn't create more tax revenue you would think ABC would never have allowed him to ask that question.
He even gave examples and time periods.

Why not? Both Obama and Gibson (and you and I and Laffer) agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt. Why wouldn't ABC let a true statement be made by Gibson?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, I am pointing out that you DON'T agree with Obama, but you will gladly use him if when he agrees with you (even though he doesn't and even though you disagree with his eco policies)

BTW, lowering taxes DOES result in more tax revenue. It also results in more govt spending (unless you think the govt will spend LESS when it receives more revenue), greater deficits, and increases the national debt

If lowering taxes didn't create more tax revenue you would think ABC would never have allowed him to ask that question.
He even gave examples and time periods.

Why not? Both Obama and Gibson (and you and I and Laffer) agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt. Why wouldn't ABC let a true statement be made by Gibson?

You're the one that says it doesn't work that way.

 

[sangha]

If lowering taxes didn't create more tax revenue you would think ABC would never have allowed him to ask that question.
He even gave examples and time periods.

Why not? Both Obama and Gibson (and you and I and Laffer) agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt. Why wouldn't ABC let a true statement be made by Gibson?

You're the one that says it doesn't work that way.

Umm, I guess you didn't read the part where I said I agree that it DOES work that way

Both Obama and Gibson (and you and I and Laffer) agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt.

 

[Agit8r]

"The great object should be to combat the evil: 1. By establishing a political equality among all. 2. By withholding unnecessary opportunities from a few, to increase the inequality of property, by an immoderate, and especially an unmerited, accumulation of riches. 3. By the silent operation of laws, which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity, and raise extreme indigence towards a state of comfort. 4. By abstaining from measures which operate differently on different interests, and particularly such as favor one interest at the expence of another. 5. By making one party a check on the other, so far as the existence of parties cannot be prevented, nor their views accommodated. If this is not the language of reason, it is that of republicanism."

-- James Madison; from Parties, 1792

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why not? Both Obama and Gibson (and you and I and Laffer) agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt. Why wouldn't ABC let a true statement be made by Gibson?

You're the one that says it doesn't work that way.

Umm, I guess you didn't read the part where I said I agree that it DOES work that way

Both Obama and Gibson (and you and I and Laffer) agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt.

So now you're saying it does work
Lowering taxes creates more tax revenue for the government?

 

[sangha]

You're the one that says it doesn't work that way.

Umm, I guess you didn't read the part where I said I agree that it DOES work that way

Both Obama and Gibson (and you and I and Laffer) agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt.

So now you're saying it does work
Lowering taxes creates more tax revenue for the government?

No, I'm saying you are too illitertate to understand that "I agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt" means that "I agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt"

It does NOT mean "It does work". Even Laffer acknowledges that it FAILED

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Umm, I guess you didn't read the part where I said I agree that it DOES work that way

So now you're saying it does work
Lowering taxes creates more tax revenue for the government?

No, I'm saying you are too illitertate to understand that "I agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt" means that "I agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt"

It does NOT mean "It does work". Even Laffer acknowledges that it FAILED

It does NOT mean "It does work". Even Laffer acknowledges that it FAILED

Let's cut out the word play games
Does lowering taxes create more tax revenue for the government? Yes or no?

 

[sangha]

So now you're saying it does work
Lowering taxes creates more tax revenue for the government?

No, I'm saying you are too illitertate to understand that "I agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt" means that "I agree that cutting taxes results in more tax revenue for the govt"

It does NOT mean "It does work". Even Laffer acknowledges that it FAILED

Let's cut out the word play games
Does lowering taxes create more tax revenue for the government? Yes or no?

Lowering tax rates, increases govt revenue, increases budget deficits, increases govt spending, and increases the national debt

In wingnut world, that means "It works!!!"