When Reagan Gave Borrowed Money To The Wealthy..........

[bripat9643]

Do you even understand how the tax system works?

Allowing someone to keep more their money is not giving borrowed money to them......

Yes it is unless you reject the idea that the people are responsible for their government's spending.

Sorry asshole, but I'm not responsible for what Congress spends. Your theory is pure moonshine right out of the starting gate.

Take it to a smaller level. If your school district builds a new high school, let's say, for 10 million dollars, which represents a 10 million dollar increase over the last school budget, but,

your district doesn't raise school taxes, but borrows the money instead,

the taxpayers have been allowed to keep their share of that building cost only because borrowed money was used instead of tax money.

Your idiotic theory that I automatically have a "share" in the cost of government boondoggles is obviously wrong.

No one has ever paid back the money borrowed during the Reagan years. That debt just keeps getting rolled over, and new debt is added on top of it. The deficit spending during the Reagan years will never be paid off by the taxpayers who lived during the Reagan years.

So what's your point? We all know what the national debt is. When are all the greedy geezers sucking down Social Security going to pay it back so their grand children won't have to?

 

[bripat9643]

If you don't understand math, I guess it's futile to try to carry on a conversation about math with you.

Your "math" only works in La-La land.

 

[Katzndogz]

Do you even understand how the tax system works?

Allowing someone to keep more their money is not giving borrowed money to them......

Yes it is unless you reject the idea that the people are responsible for their government's spending.

Sorry asshole, but I'm not responsible for what Congress spends. Your theory is pure moonshine right out of the starting gate.

Take it to a smaller level. If your school district builds a new high school, let's say, for 10 million dollars, which represents a 10 million dollar increase over the last school budget, but,

your district doesn't raise school taxes, but borrows the money instead,

the taxpayers have been allowed to keep their share of that building cost only because borrowed money was used instead of tax money.

Your idiotic theory that I automatically have a "share" in the cost of government boondoggles is obviously wrong.

No one has ever paid back the money borrowed during the Reagan years. That debt just keeps getting rolled over, and new debt is added on top of it. The deficit spending during the Reagan years will never be paid off by the taxpayers who lived during the Reagan years.

So what's your point? We all know what the national debt is. When are all the greedy geezers sucking down Social Security going to pay it back so their grand children won't have to?

The greedy geezers paid into that system all their lives. Give them back their money PLUS the interest they would have made. Then there's an argument.

This is the same thing the government wants to argue on pension funds. Even if you paid into a pension plan, why should you get any of it back? Is there any reason why a pension fund today have to pay someone because they paid into it 20 years ago?

 

[Papageorgio]

Reagan never gave borrowed money to the wealthy. Negged for lying.

Your naivity is overwhelming. He gave tax cuts to the wealthy and began to quadruple the national debt. Borrowing and funneling the money to the wealthy is exactly what he did.

Bill Clinton came along, raised taxes and straightened things out and then old dumbassed George Bush cut taxes twice, started two wars and doubled the national debt again. You can't cut your income and spend more at the same time. That shit just won't work. Do you run your personal business that way? If you do you are a fool.

Reagan raised the effective tax rate by closing up the deductions, it increased the revenue. He was the last President to do so.

Now, Congress promised to cut spending if Reagan signed their bill to increase taxes. Congress lied and never cut spending.

 

[FJO]

Do you even understand how the tax system works?

Allowing someone to keep more their money is not giving borrowed money to them......

Yes it is unless you reject the idea that the people are responsible for their government's spending.

Sorry asshole, but I'm not responsible for what Congress spends. Your theory is pure moonshine right out of the starting gate.

Take it to a smaller level. If your school district builds a new high school, let's say, for 10 million dollars, which represents a 10 million dollar increase over the last school budget, but,

your district doesn't raise school taxes, but borrows the money instead,

the taxpayers have been allowed to keep their share of that building cost only because borrowed money was used instead of tax money.

Your idiotic theory that I automatically have a "share" in the cost of government boondoggles is obviously wrong.

No one has ever paid back the money borrowed during the Reagan years. That debt just keeps getting rolled over, and new debt is added on top of it. The deficit spending during the Reagan years will never be paid off by the taxpayers who lived during the Reagan years.

So what's your point? We all know what the national debt is. When are all the greedy geezers sucking down Social Security going to pay it back so their grand children won't have to?

Actually the ``greedy geezers` are not all that greedy. They just hope to collect some of the money they contributed during their working years.

The real GREEDY ones are the free-loading misbegotten children and grand children of the Greatest Generation, (you know, baby boomers and younger) who refuse any suggestion to raise the retirement and Social Security eligibility age, in spite of the fact that with improved health care and looking after themselves they could work well into their 70`s.

And the REAL REAL greedy ones are the public service unions who bankrupted California and soon to be bankrupting other states with their taking communities hostage by strikes demanding unreasonable and totally undeserved pensions for their life-long free-loading members and private jets and limousines for their executives.

Take a look at Greece and you will see America`s future.

 

[bripat9643]

The greedy geezers paid into that system all their lives. Give them back their money PLUS the interest they would have made. Then there's an argument.

Congress already spent their money. It's gone. the greedy geezers voted for the criminals who did it, so they have no one but themselves to blame. Why should people who aren't even born yet have to pay for the mistakes of the greedy geezers?

This is the same thing the government wants to argue on pension funds. Even if you paid into a pension plan, why should you get any of it back? Is there any reason why a pension fund today have to pay someone because they paid into it 20 years ago?

Social Security isn't a pension fund. It's a Ponzi scheme. A pension fund has actual money it it, and the fund is legally obligated to pay that money out to the beneficiaries. There is no such arrangement with Social Security.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Reagan killed Soviet Communism in Eastern Europe, he beat them so badly he left them no choice but to complete their takeover of the Democrat Party, that's why Democrats hate Reagan, they're speaking with their master's voice

 

[Cammmpbell]

................in the form of tax cuts and ruined the PATCO union was that the beginning of the end for our middle class?

Do you even understand how the tax system works?

Allowing someone to keep more their money is not giving borrowed money to them......

That's a load of right wing bullshit. Tax cuts for the wealthy is what created this enormous debt. People in this country...all the way up to the 1980's used to share and pay their way...not a bunch of greedy, inept, paper shuffling assholes. Americans used to be patriots. During the second world war every able bodied man under forty years old put on a uniform and served in the military. When we were paying for it any wage earner who made more than $300,000 per year paid 91% of the excess in taxes. That continued through Eisenhower's two terms. Now...with tax rates the lowest they've been in forty years all you can hear from the Republicans is "We Need More Tax Cuts"

I have news for you...."Trickle Down" was a bold faced insult to everyone except the assholes getting the breaks. It didn't work and it never will.

 

[FJO]

Reagan killed Soviet Communism in Eastern Europe, he beat them so badly he left them no choice but to complete their takeover of the Democrat Party, that's why Democrats hate Reagan, they;re speaking with their master's voice

You are absolutely correct. Reagan's resolve and his philosophy of "Peace thru Strength" brought about the collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberation of its slave countries, my old country among them.

Yet, the Left, including to the rotten-to-the-core and corrupt Nobel Prize committee gave the Prize to Gorbachev, but not Reagan. Clear case of glorifying a weak-kneed coward and disrespecting a hero.

If anyone disagrees with my contention that the Nobel people are despicable dirtbags, explain to me the Peace Prize given to their soul-mates, Gore and Obama.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Naivity isn't a word. My money doesn't belong to the government, you Marxist pig. Every penny I earn is MINE and when the government cuts taxes that's just less they are stealing from me and everyone else to buy votes from jealous parasites like you.



No shit, Sherlock, yet you support Obama who has done exactly that so shut the fuck up. You have no credibility.

You're an anarchist. That's rather demented.

You're a moron.

What would you call a person who thinks all taxation is stealing, and therefore a crime, and therefore believes that no government can legitimately exist,

since obviously no government can function without taxation?

Eh? You tell us.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[Social Security isn't a pension fund. It's a Ponzi scheme. A pension fund has actual money it it, and the fund is legally obligated to pay that money out to the beneficiaries. There is no such arrangement with Social Security.

There isn't? What is wrong with you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

.

Ugh.

I'm not a "cut tax rates at all costs" absolutist, I agree that we need to look at the point of equilibrium where marginal tax rates provide revenues without retarding growth.

However...

It amazes me that so many people think that the government is "giving" money to a taxpayer when they're lowering their tax rates or keeping them low. Have we not yet learned that it's not the government's money to "give"? That arranging for a person to keep more of what they have earned is not "giving" them anything?

I suspect this ties in with the "you didn't build that" stuff. If "you didn't build that", it's not yours, it was "given" to you by the government, so the government can take more of it back.

Tough to solve problems when you can't even agree on facts.

.

Actually, if current tax law puts you under an obligation to pay, let's say for example, 10% of your income to the government,

that IS the government's money. They have, under current law, a legal, legitimate claim to it,

as many a person who may for whatever reason not paid their taxes has found out.

So...

...if you made 50,000 and had a 10% tax rate obligation under current tax law, that $5000 is not 'your money'...

...it is by law the government's money.

If, then, you get a tax CUT, let's to 8%, your tax obligation would fall to $4000, thus,

the government has given back to you $1000 that under previous law belonged to the government. No, it was not 'your money'.

Like it not, those are the facts.

 

[FJO]

.

Ugh.

I'm not a "cut tax rates at all costs" absolutist, I agree that we need to look at the point of equilibrium where marginal tax rates provide revenues without retarding growth.

However...

It amazes me that so many people think that the government is "giving" money to a taxpayer when they're lowering their tax rates or keeping them low. Have we not yet learned that it's not the government's money to "give"? That arranging for a person to keep more of what they have earned is not "giving" them anything?

I suspect this ties in with the "you didn't build that" stuff. If "you didn't build that", it's not yours, it was "given" to you by the government, so the government can take more of it back.

Tough to solve problems when you can't even agree on facts.

.

Actually, if current tax law puts you under an obligation to pay, let's say for example, 10% of your income to the government,

that IS the government's money. They have, under current law, a legal, legitimate claim to it,

as many a person who may for whatever reason not paid their taxes has found out.

So...

...if you made 50,000 and had a 10% tax rate obligation under current tax law, that $5000 is not 'your money'...

...it is by law the government's money.

If, then, you get a tax CUT, let's to 8%, your tax obligation would fall to $4000, thus,

the government has given back to you $1000 that under previous law belonged to the government. No, it was not 'your money'.

Like it not, those are the facts.

In your example/illustration you forgot to mention that when the government reduced the tax rate from 10% to 8%, they changed the law. Thus, only $4,000 of your earnings lawfully belonged to the government, according to the law, so in effect they gave you nothing. That $1,000 belong to you.

Like it or not, those are the facts.

 

[Cammmpbell]

Reagan killed Soviet Communism in Eastern Europe, he beat them so badly he left them no choice but to complete their takeover of the Democrat Party, that's why Democrats hate Reagan, they;re speaking with their master's voice

You are absolutely correct. Reagan's resolve and his philosophy of "Peace thru Strength" brought about the collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberation of its slave countries, my old country among them.

Yet, the Left, including to the rotten-to-the-core and corrupt Nobel Prize committee gave the Prize to Gorbachev, but not Reagan. Clear case of glorifying a weak-kneed coward and disrespecting a hero.

If anyone disagrees with my contention that the Nobel people are despicable dirtbags, explain to me the Peace Prize given to their soul-mates, Gore and Obama.

I hate to burst your bubble. Your precious Reagan was a Democrat and the president of a union until his grade B movies began to make some serious bucks...then for the rest of his life he worked on tax cuts for the wealthy. You want to talk "standing up to the Soviets" you should read the events surrounding and involved in the nuclear missile crisis in Cuba. John Kennedy stood toe to toe with Krusheiv and put a naval embargo in place which ultimately caused the Soviet military to load up their nukes and get the hell out of Dodge. We were on the brink of ww3 for several days.

I think one could evaluate the day to day events of Reagan's presidency and come to the conclusion that alzheimers was beginning to set in at least 10 years before the public knew about him being taken by it. After all......not too many politicians in their right mind would have sent 1500 state-of-the-art ballistic missles to Iran and hidden it from the American public.

 

[Stephanie]

It's a shame these people don't have this much interest in what OBMAMA is doing to us and our country..

 

[tooAlive]

And since Reagan, welfare spending has steadily been going up. With more and more people relying on government taxpayer-funded assistance for their paychecks.

 

[tooAlive]

Reagan killed Soviet Communism in Eastern Europe, he beat them so badly he left them no choice but to complete their takeover of the Democrat Party, that's why Democrats hate Reagan, they;re speaking with their master's voice

You are absolutely correct. Reagan's resolve and his philosophy of "Peace thru Strength" brought about the collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberation of its slave countries, my old country among them.

Yet, the Left, including to the rotten-to-the-core and corrupt Nobel Prize committee gave the Prize to Gorbachev, but not Reagan. Clear case of glorifying a weak-kneed coward and disrespecting a hero.

If anyone disagrees with my contention that the Nobel people are despicable dirtbags, explain to me the Peace Prize given to their soul-mates, Gore and Obama.

I hate to burst your bubble. Your precious Reagan was a Democrat and the president of a union until his grade B movies began to make some serious bucks...then for the rest of his life he worked on tax cuts for the wealthy. You want to talk "standing up to the Soviets" you should read the events surrounding and involved in the nuclear missile crisis in Cuba. John Kennedy stood toe to toe with Krusheiv and put a naval embargo in place which ultimately caused the Soviet military to load up their nukes and get the hell out of Dodge. We were on the brink of ww3 for several days.

I think one could evaluate the day to day events of Reagan's presidency and come to the conclusion that alzheimers was beginning to set in at least 10 years before the public knew about him being taken by it. After all......not too many politicians in their right mind would have sent 1500 state-of-the-art ballistic missles to Iran and hidden it from the American public.

Reagan was a Democrat until he realized their pattern of thinking was slowly sinking this country.

"There is no right or left, only up or down."

If you have 30 minutes to educate yourself, you'd notice that everything he talked about and warned us about is happening. Shame on you for trying to stain the name of one of the most noble and honorable men this country has ever seen.

[ame=http://youtu.be/qXBswFfh6AY]"A Time for Choosing" by Ronald Reagan - YouTube[/ame]

 

[FJO]

Reagan killed Soviet Communism in Eastern Europe, he beat them so badly he left them no choice but to complete their takeover of the Democrat Party, that's why Democrats hate Reagan, they;re speaking with their master's voice

You are absolutely correct. Reagan's resolve and his philosophy of "Peace thru Strength" brought about the collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberation of its slave countries, my old country among them.

Yet, the Left, including to the rotten-to-the-core and corrupt Nobel Prize committee gave the Prize to Gorbachev, but not Reagan. Clear case of glorifying a weak-kneed coward and disrespecting a hero.

If anyone disagrees with my contention that the Nobel people are despicable dirtbags, explain to me the Peace Prize given to their soul-mates, Gore and Obama.

I hate to burst your bubble. Your precious Reagan was a Democrat and the president of a union until his grade B movies began to make some serious bucks...then for the rest of his life he worked on tax cuts for the wealthy. You want to talk "standing up to the Soviets" you should read the events surrounding and involved in the nuclear missile crisis in Cuba. John Kennedy stood toe to toe with Krusheiv and put a naval embargo in place which ultimately caused the Soviet military to load up their nukes and get the hell out of Dodge. We were on the brink of ww3 for several days.

I think one could evaluate the day to day events of Reagan's presidency and come to the conclusion that alzheimers was beginning to set in at least 10 years before the public knew about him being taken by it. After all......not too many politicians in their right mind would have sent 1500 state-of-the-art ballistic missles to Iran and hidden it from the American public.

Yes, Reagan used to be Democrat until the Democratic Party left him. Eventually just about every soberly thinking and rational Democrat becomes Republican. Eventually every child grows up and starts thinking for himself.

Saul, who was the wildest and most vicious persecutor of Christians, became on the road to Damascus, one of Christianity's most revered saints.

So, conversion is not only possible, but normal people it is the only way to sanity. As he old saying goes: A conservative is a former liberal who got mugged.

I read about Kennedy, the philandering tom cat. And I stood up to Soviet tanks in October 1956 in Hungary when I was only seventeen.

To say that President Reagan was afflicted with Alzheimer's disease two years before his first election to be President puts one of your heroes, the peanut farmer, one of your personal heroes, Jimmy Carter I in a stupid class all by himself for the way Ronald Reagan demolished him and send him packing to Habitat for Humanity for phony photo opportunities, takes an especially evil and ignorant person, such as yourself.

BTW, I said Jimmy Carter I, because Jimmy Carter II - another of your heroes - will get his ass kicked back to Chicago on November 6th.

 

[Cammmpbell]

You are absolutely correct. Reagan's resolve and his philosophy of "Peace thru Strength" brought about the collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberation of its slave countries, my old country among them.

Yet, the Left, including to the rotten-to-the-core and corrupt Nobel Prize committee gave the Prize to Gorbachev, but not Reagan. Clear case of glorifying a weak-kneed coward and disrespecting a hero.

If anyone disagrees with my contention that the Nobel people are despicable dirtbags, explain to me the Peace Prize given to their soul-mates, Gore and Obama.

I hate to burst your bubble. Your precious Reagan was a Democrat and the president of a union until his grade B movies began to make some serious bucks...then for the rest of his life he worked on tax cuts for the wealthy. You want to talk "standing up to the Soviets" you should read the events surrounding and involved in the nuclear missile crisis in Cuba. John Kennedy stood toe to toe with Krusheiv and put a naval embargo in place which ultimately caused the Soviet military to load up their nukes and get the hell out of Dodge. We were on the brink of ww3 for several days.

I think one could evaluate the day to day events of Reagan's presidency and come to the conclusion that alzheimers was beginning to set in at least 10 years before the public knew about him being taken by it. After all......not too many politicians in their right mind would have sent 1500 state-of-the-art ballistic missles to Iran and hidden it from the American public.

Reagan was a Democrat until he realized their pattern of thinking was slowly sinking this country.

"There is no right or left, only up or down."

If you have 30 minutes to educate yourself, you'd notice that everything he talked about and warned us about is happening. Shame on you for trying to stain the name of one of the most noble and honorable men this country has ever seen.

[ame=http://youtu.be/qXBswFfh6AY]"A Time for Choosing" by Ronald Reagan - YouTube[/ame]

Horse shit!! The guy cut taxes for the wealthy and his own vice president called the plan "voodoo exonomics" The two of them borrowed $3 trillion to fund cuts for the wealthiest Americans. We used to pay our way.George W. Bush came along and did the same thing again. You people won't be satisfied until a member of what used to be the middle class is working 80 hours a week with no benefits....about the same as a Maylasian day laborer.

 

[FJO]

Reagan killed Soviet Communism in Eastern Europe, he beat them so badly he left them no choice but to complete their takeover of the Democrat Party, that's why Democrats hate Reagan, they;re speaking with their master's voice

You are absolutely correct. Reagan's resolve and his philosophy of "Peace thru Strength" brought about the collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberation of its slave countries, my old country among them.

Yet, the Left, including to the rotten-to-the-core and corrupt Nobel Prize committee gave the Prize to Gorbachev, but not Reagan. Clear case of glorifying a weak-kneed coward and disrespecting a hero.

If anyone disagrees with my contention that the Nobel people are despicable dirtbags, explain to me the Peace Prize given to their soul-mates, Gore and Obama.

I hate to burst your bubble. Your precious Reagan was a Democrat and the president of a union until his grade B movies began to make some serious bucks...then for the rest of his life he worked on tax cuts for the wealthy. You want to talk "standing up to the Soviets" you should read the events surrounding and involved in the nuclear missile crisis in Cuba. John Kennedy stood toe to toe with Krusheiv and put a naval embargo in place which ultimately caused the Soviet military to load up their nukes and get the hell out of Dodge. We were on the brink of ww3 for several days.

I think one could evaluate the day to day events of Reagan's presidency and come to the conclusion that alzheimers was beginning to set in at least 10 years before the public knew about him being taken by it. After all......not too many politicians in their right mind would have sent 1500 state-of-the-art ballistic missles to Iran and hidden it from the American public.

Yes, Reagan used to be Democrat until the Democratic Party left him. Eventually just about every soberly thinking and rational Democrat becomes Republican. Eventually every child grows up and starts thinking for himself.

Saul, who was the wildest and most vicious persecutor of Christians, became on the road to Damascus, one of Christianity's most revered saints.

So, conversion is not only possible, but normal people it is the only way to sanity. As he old saying goes: A conservative is a former liberal who got mugged.

I read about Kennedy, the philandering tom cat. And I stood up to Soviet tanks in October 1956 in Hungary when I was only seventeen.

To say that President Reagan was afflicted with Alzheimer's disease two years before his first election to be President puts one of your heroes, the peanut farmer, one of your personal heroes, Jimmy Carter I in a stupid class all by himself for the way Ronald Reagan demolished him and send him packing to Habitat for Humanity for phony photo opportunities, takes an especially evil and ignorant person, such as yourself.

BTW, I said Jimmy Carter I, because Jimmy Carter II - another of your heroes - will get his ass kicked back to Chicago on November 6th.