Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
How about refuting his point?
We had our greatest prosperity when we had a vibrant, unionized middle class, and the wealthy paid their fair share.
Except we didn't . All our economic prosperity happens in the brief periods of when we don't use socialism
tapatalk post
Guy, put down the Obamaphone and get to a computer where you can actually do some research.
Or better yet, read a book.
Greatest period of American Prosperity- 1945-1975.
Full employment
Burgeoning middle class.
High Taxes on the Rich.
33% of the work force unionized.
Moms could stay home if they wanted.
Built hiways and put men in space and even fought a pointless war or two.
Except we didn't . All our economic prosperity happens in the brief periods of when we don't use socialism
tapatalk post
Guy, put down the Obamaphone and get to a computer where you can actually do some research.
Or better yet, read a book.
Greatest period of American Prosperity- 1945-1975.
Full employment
Burgeoning middle class.
High Taxes on the Rich.
33% of the work force unionized.
Moms could stay home if they wanted.
Built hiways and put men in space and even fought a pointless war or two.
Oh yea, and there were unicorns and lolipops as well. It is a shame Doc Brown is dead, I want to get my hands on that DeLorean.
But in all serious, after you bomb all of Europe to oblivion in WW2, you can pretty much do any hair-brained economic policy you want, and still be the Top Dog.
We live in a different world today buddy.
How about refuting his point?
We had our greatest prosperity when we had a vibrant, unionized middle class, and the wealthy paid their fair share.
Except we didn't . All our economic prosperity happens in the brief periods of when we don't use socialism
tapatalk post
Guy, put down the Obamaphone and get to a computer where you can actually do some research.
Or better yet, read a book.
Greatest period of American Prosperity- 1945-1975.
Full employment
Burgeoning middle class.
High Taxes on the Rich.
33% of the work force unionized.
Moms could stay home if they wanted.
Built hiways and put men in space and even fought a pointless war or two.
Except we didn't . All our economic prosperity happens in the brief periods of when we don't use socialism
tapatalk post
Guy, put down the Obamaphone and get to a computer where you can actually do some research.
Or better yet, read a book.
Greatest period of American Prosperity- 1945-1975.
Full employment
Burgeoning middle class.
High Taxes on the Rich.
33% of the work force unionized.
Moms could stay home if they wanted.
Built hiways and put men in space and even fought a pointless war or two.
The reason why we shifted away from your mythical Worker's Paradise era is because by the end of that time period, unemployment was 9% and inflation was 12%. A new word was created to describe it - "stagflation."
That you think the prosperity of that time period was somehow linked to high taxes on the rich and unionization, not to mention your ridiculous belief that people were better off 50 years ago than they are today, highlights your ignorance once again.
Guy, put down the Obamaphone and get to a computer where you can actually do some research.
Or better yet, read a book.
Greatest period of American Prosperity- 1945-1975.
Full employment
Burgeoning middle class.
High Taxes on the Rich.
33% of the work force unionized.
Moms could stay home if they wanted.
Built hiways and put men in space and even fought a pointless war or two.
The reason why we shifted away from your mythical Worker's Paradise era is because by the end of that time period, unemployment was 9% and inflation was 12%. A new word was created to describe it - "stagflation."
That you think the prosperity of that time period was somehow linked to high taxes on the rich and unionization, not to mention your ridiculous belief that people were better off 50 years ago than they are today, highlights your ignorance once again.
Tojo, the thing was, the way Carter combatted the inflation was the same way Reagan did- keep the money encourage unemployment until the inflation got down.
Reagan also took the time to screw unions and give huge tax breaks to the Rich Douchebags, neither of which did us any good.
Thing is, had we not done those things, we wouldn't have been in the mess we are today with 16 trillion dollars of debt because it's easier to borrow than to get the rich to pay their fair share.
That he BARELY won speaks volumes. Yeah, we learned a lot.
That in a swing state, voters would rather have a corrupt Democrat has-been than a Tea Party standard-bearer.
Reality hurts sometimes.
The reason why we shifted away from your mythical Worker's Paradise era is because by the end of that time period, unemployment was 9% and inflation was 12%. A new word was created to describe it - "stagflation."
That you think the prosperity of that time period was somehow linked to high taxes on the rich and unionization, not to mention your ridiculous belief that people were better off 50 years ago than they are today, highlights your ignorance once again.
Tojo, the thing was, the way Carter combatted the inflation was the same way Reagan did- keep the money encourage unemployment until the inflation got down.
Reagan also took the time to screw unions and give huge tax breaks to the Rich Douchebags, neither of which did us any good.
Thing is, had we not done those things, we wouldn't have been in the mess we are today with 16 trillion dollars of debt because it's easier to borrow than to get the rich to pay their fair share.
ROFL what an idiot. Tax revenues went up you dolt. Do you want high tax "revenues" or high tax "rates?" Why are libtards so damn stupid?
Stockman, former Director of OMB under Reagan, would differ w/ you there 
Taking Stockman: How Nixon, Reagan, Bush and their GOP Demolished the Economy
Reagan knew it. So did Stockman. So did their guru, Friederich von Hayek. The deficits were intentional all along. They were edsigned to “starve the beast,” meaning intentionally cut revenue as a way of pressuring Congress to cut the New Deal programs Reagan wanted to demolish. “The plan,” Stockman told Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan at the time, ” was to have a strategic deficit that would give you an argument for cutting back the programs that weren’t desired. It got out of hand.”
Tojo, the thing was, the way Carter combatted the inflation was the same way Reagan did- keep the money encourage unemployment until the inflation got down.
Reagan also took the time to screw unions and give huge tax breaks to the Rich Douchebags, neither of which did us any good.
Thing is, had we not done those things, we wouldn't have been in the mess we are today with 16 trillion dollars of debt because it's easier to borrow than to get the rich to pay their fair share.
ROFL what an idiot. Tax revenues went up you dolt. Do you want high tax "revenues" or high tax "rates?" Why are libtards so damn stupid?
So the Gipper's people didn't use "fuzzy math"?
David Stockman: How Nixon, Reagan, the Bushes and their GOP Demolished the Economy - David Stockman on Deficit Spending
Taking Stockman: How Nixon, Reagan, Bush and their GOP Demolished the Economy
Reagan knew it. So did Stockman. So did their guru, Friederich von Hayek. The deficits were intentional all along. They were edsigned to “starve the beast,” meaning intentionally cut revenue as a way of pressuring Congress to cut the New Deal programs Reagan wanted to demolish. “The plan,” Stockman told Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan at the time, ” was to have a strategic deficit that would give you an argument for cutting back the programs that weren’t desired. It got out of hand.”
Von Hayek is quoted in the next paragraph agreeing w/ what Stockman said
Here:Andrew Samwick, who was Chief Economist on Bush's Council of Economic Advisers from 2003–2004 responded to the claim:
You are smart people. You know that the tax cuts have not fueled record revenues. You know what it takes to establish causality. You know that the first order effect of cutting taxes is to lower tax revenues. We all agree that the ultimate reduction in tax revenues can be less than this first order effect, because lower tax rates encourage greater economic activity and thus expand the tax base. No thoughtful person believes that this possible offset more than compensated for the first effect for these tax cuts. Not a single one
If only he was more conservative, he would have won.
They wouldn't work in today's world. In the 50s, there was no China, no Japan, no India, no South Korea, No Russia, no Germany, and by extension no EU to compete with as they were all leveled during World War Two(and thus rebuilding) or still third world economies. America had no competitors, so it could afford to make itself uncompetitive and feel no adverse effects. That simply wouldn't be the case in a globalized economy.Guy, put down the Obamaphone and get to a computer where you can actually do some research.
Or better yet, read a book.
Greatest period of American Prosperity- 1945-1975.
Full employment
Burgeoning middle class.
High Taxes on the Rich.
33% of the work force unionized.
Moms could stay home if they wanted.
Built hiways and put men in space and even fought a pointless war or two.
Oh yea, and there were unicorns and lolipops as well. It is a shame Doc Brown is dead, I want to get my hands on that DeLorean.
But in all serious, after you bomb all of Europe to oblivion in WW2, you can pretty much do any hair-brained economic policy you want, and still be the Top Dog.
We live in a different world today buddy.
You are right, we do.
We stopped doing all the things that worked, let the wealthy have everything they want, and we discovered the same thing that we discovered before world war II.
"The problem with Capitalism is Capitalists... they're too damned greedy." - Herbert Hoover.
He a POS Troll. I don't think I've seen him post anything but...
The pos white reactionary entitlement TeaPoCraps are not mainstream.
They are extremists who will not serve our country in the American way
in the American way......in the American way........hummmmmmm
Is that where half the population feeds and insures the other?.
The pos white reactionary entitlement TeaPoCraps are not mainstream.
They are extremists who will not serve our country in the American way
in the American way......in the American way........hummmmmmm
Is that where half the population feeds and insures the other?.
You want to prove that stupidity of a comment, Contumacious? You have facts and evidence?
Didn't think so.
in the American way......in the American way........hummmmmmm
Is that where half the population feeds and insures the other?.
You want to prove that stupidity of a comment, Contumacious? You have facts and evidence?
Didn't think so.
Prove him wrong Fakie
tapatalk post
You want to prove that stupidity of a comment, Contumacious? You have facts and evidence?
Didn't think so.
Prove him wrong Fakie
tapatalk post
Don't have to disprove a false opinion, of which you are not very good though you try.
You want to prove that stupidity of a comment, Contumacious? You have facts and evidence?
Didn't think so.
Prove him wrong Fakie
tapatalk post
Don't have to disprove a false opinion, of which you are not very good though you try.
Prove him wrong Fakie
tapatalk post
Don't have to disprove a false opinion, of which you are not very good though you try.
If he is wrong prove it you dishonest hack
tapatalk post
Prove him wrong Fakie
tapatalk post
Don't have to disprove a false opinion, of which you are not very good though you try.
Can just see your fat ass communist butt sitting in front of your slobbered on keyboard, typing that.
[
ROFL what an idiot. Tax revenues went up you dolt. Do you want high tax "revenues" or high tax "rates?" Why are libtards so damn stupid?
[
They wouldn't work in today's world. In the 50s, there was no China, no Japan, no India, no South Korea, No Russia, no Germany, and by extension no EU to compete with as they were all leveled during World War Two(and thus rebuilding) or still third world economies. America had no competitors, so it could afford to make itself uncompetitive and feel no adverse effects. That simply wouldn't be the case in a globalized economy.
