Huh? In what fairy tale world has our national debt been reduced under the Obama administration?As a final note, President Obama has managed to outperform Ronald Reagan in all of these areas, while at the same time, reducing the national debt.
Huh? In what fairy tale world has our national debt been reduced under the Obama administration?As a final note, President Obama has managed to outperform Ronald Reagan in all of these areas, while at the same time, reducing the national debt.
I'd be more concerned but the fact is that she added almost nothing and quoted the highlights from the Forbes article.Originally Posted by dwarthog
If anything, she's just lazy and threw a story together based on another story and put a fancy headline on it.
It takes one to know one, and I know you don't know a damn thing.
She seeks economic and environmental justice, so I'm sure she's not going to point out the 2 main drivers of this economy - 1) The fracking boom which has created tens of thousands of jobs and cheap energy driving manufacturing growth and 2) The Fed loose money policy which has driven greater income inequality. The inconvenient truths that the Obama supporters will ignore to support "thier guy."
Yep, there is a lot of that being done these days.
She would had to have applied critical thinking to the whole issue instead of just going for a "See our guy is spectacular" fluff piece.
She was the author of the entire article
Author: Randa Morris Randa Morris has been a freelance writer for over ten years. She is an active political blogger and administrator for several social media activism groups.
Quote
If God wanted Men to look women in the eyes, He wouldnt have gave em Boobs !
It is true that is it is an "undeniable FACT THAT CG REVENUES INCREASED AFTER EVERY REDUCTION IN THE CG RATE".
It is true that is it an undeniable FACT THAT CG REVENUES WERE INCREASING BEFORE EACH AND EVERYONE OF THE REDUCTIONS IN THE CG TAX RATE!
It is true that is it an undeniable FACT THAT THE STOCK MARKET WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF SURGING IN EVERYONE OF THE REDUCTIONS IN THE CG TAX RATE!
You have a problem with cause and effect.
YOU contend that cuttin' the cg tax rates CAUSED the cg revenues to go up. They did not.
It is not my opinion, it is a fact. Learn to live with facts.
As for the considered to be the best economic president ever - who is widely considered by conservatives as the best economic president ever. It's by conservatives.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhart...vote-democrat/
LOW COST ENERGY? Natural gas is about the only one. Tell me how obama is killing the oil industry. Face facts and stop listening to rightwingnuts who want to only credit republicans with any economic growth.
Glad you finally admitted CG revenues went up after CG rates were reduced. That wasn't so hard was it 8th?It is true that is it is an "undeniable FACT THAT CG REVENUES INCREASED AFTER EVERY REDUCTION IN THE CG RATE".
It is true that is it an undeniable FACT THAT CG REVENUES WERE INCREASING BEFORE EACH AND EVERYONE OF THE REDUCTIONS IN THE CG TAX RATE!
It is true that is it an undeniable FACT THAT THE STOCK MARKET WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF SURGING IN EVERYONE OF THE REDUCTIONS IN THE CG TAX RATE!
You have a problem with cause and effect.
YOU contend that cuttin' the cg tax rates CAUSED the cg revenues to go up. They did not.
It is not my opinion, it is a fact. Learn to live with facts.
As for the considered to be the best economic president ever - who is widely considered by conservatives as the best economic president ever. It's by conservatives.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhart...vote-democrat/
LOW COST ENERGY? Natural gas is about the only one. Tell me how obama is killing the oil industry. Face facts and stop listening to rightwingnuts who want to only credit republicans with any economic growth.
You forgot to mention that JFK/Johnson dropped the top rate by 21% and still had the most successful adminstration financially of all the recent presidents. Were they acting like repubs?
Natural Gas is the big one that drives American industry and manufacturing...surely you know that. But increased US Oil production has decreased the trade deficit, created jobs and increased US exports. Now you really can't deny that when even your "guy" has had to change his direction once he realized NG and oil production were helping drive the economy and reduce the trade deficit.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidbla...-and-security/
Always with the right wing talking points while you regurgitate left wing dribble. Don't always be so defensive 8th...be man enough to admit when your guy had it wrong... like trying to put enormous taxes on energy at the height of an economic recession when, in fact, it was the low costs of NG coupled with Oil production that helped drive the economy out of the recession
(and reduced CO2).
The article states:
That would include Clinton, wouldn't it 8th?It’s Official: President Obama Is The Best Economic President In Modern Times
Cutting the cg tax rates was not the reason they went up. FACE FACTS. That's like saying I drove my car to the gas station and when I left it was filled up. Simply taking your car to the station is not the reason your car got filled up.
The tax cut was passed in 1964. GDP growth dropped from kennedy to johnson. It was 91% - do you know the difference between it being at 91% cutting it to ~70% and wanting to cut it from 39% to 25%. Two completely different things.
How did he change direction?
You haven't proven CG revenues didn't go up because the rates were reduced...only that it occurred during growth cycles in the market. Nobody disputed that. You also ignored that CG revenues increased at a greater rate than the market when Clinton cut them...but we've already been over that. And, of course, you totally ignored Obama's statement that he would raise CG rates even if it didn't increase revenues...out of "fairness". Is that in your left wing talking points?
The tax cuts happened under Johnson, they were proposed by Kennedy before he was assissinated. You're the one that wants to deal in absolutes. Cutting the top rate is always bad if it is proposed by a pub but when its a dem its okay. How did the top rates get to 91%? Did the pubs do that?
Do I need to drag out Obamas campaign rhetoric of 2008 and compare it with his new found (quiet) love of NG or taking credit for the rise in oil and gas production. Perhaps his ban on offshore drilling in the Atlantic/Pacific to now allowing geophysical mapping of the Atlantic as a shift in direction. He certainly hasn't been pushing his pathetic huge taxes on NG and oil like he did in 2008-9. He is still an impediment but that is probably due to having to appease the enviro nazis in the dem party now once he recognized the economy was responding to oil and gas production and not his proposed "millions of green jobs" initial approach.
Jesus, you are that dense. I PROVED IT!!!!
Proponents of low capital gains tax rates like to argue that a surge in capital gains after 1978 and 1981 proves that capital gains tax cuts cause the well off to cash in far more unrealized gains, thereby mitigating or even eliminating the apparent revenue loss from a special low capital gains tax. To be sure, reported gains (before exclusion) did increase rapidly in the late seventies and early eighties. In nominal terms, they rose from $45 billion in 1977 to $80 billion in 1980 to $176 billion by 1985. Adjusted for the growth of the economy, this represents a 90% increase in reported gains from 1977 to 1985. Even if all the increase in capital gains realizations could somehow be attributed to the tax cuts, these figures would still indicate that the tax cuts lowered revenues, since the capital gains tax rate was cut about in half between 1977 and 1985. But much of the increase in reported gains simply reflected the stock market's recovery from the oil-price shocks of the seventies--and thus would have happened even absent the tax changes.
Moreover, a very large share of the increased capital gains in the first half of the eighties represented tax-shelter conversions of ordinary income into gains. This kind of tax-induced surge in reported gains actually means a pure revenue loss. If, as Michael Kinsley has noted, we cut taxes in half for people named "Newt," then we surely would find that Newts reported much more income on tax returns. Indeed, total taxes paid by people named Newt might even go up. But that would merely reflect millions of people changing their names to Newt to avoid taxes, not some magical supply-side effect on Newts' incentives to work, save and earn money. The same is true of tax breaks for income called "capital gains."
http://www.ctj.org/hid_ent/part-2/part2-2.htm
Name calling again 8th? Try to stay on an even keel for a change. I still remember your "truce"...
Well I'm glad you are admitting that taxes have consequences including where investments are concerned. And, again, nobody ever said the market didn't affect CG revenues. And likewise, for all of those "Newts" out there, people will often seek avenues with the lowest tax consequences which is another reason investments were spurred in the market sector when CG rates are lower...even your article admits that.
Wow ole 8th seems like someone that maybe hasn't had some in a while. Maybe he's just frustrated with US.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
8th hates lemmings...unless it's one from the left...
The left hates intolerance, unless it's a conservative.
Some of the most persecuted class of people in the world are college students that are outspoken conservatives, attending large State Universities.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, it's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"
-----Winston Churchill
Bourbon, that is a great talking point...and you are correct. As the starter of this thread, it was not my attempt to vault him as being perfect. He certainly is not. I am a democrat, but as a democrat I cannot defend this issue. Varying sites list his deficit spending somewhere in the neighborhood of 4.7 trillion dollars! As of now, I believe spending is at or around 104% of GDP.
This very scary. While I applaud Mr Obama's attempt to overhaul the sick care industry- I am weary of what the long term costs are going to be. Something had to be tried and only time will tell.
The burden of this reckless spending is shared by every president since and including Ronald Reagan. Anybody who argues otherwise is a damn fool.
I am worried about my kids' future. I am worried that those who are in power, bethey blue or red do not operate with the goal of making it better for the next generation. This congress is the worst I can remember. Frankly I believe they love the devision they have created in this country. By keeping the masses occupied by drawing lines in the sand. They just go about their business of backdoor handshakes and operate with only their own personel wealth as their reason for being there.
Let me correct my pervious statement -
It is true that is it is an "undeniable FACT THAT CG REVENUES INCREASED AFTER EVERY REDUCTION IN THE CG RATE - TEMPORARILY. In all cases the revenues went down after a couple of years to levels LOWER than pre tax cut levels.
Reread the two paragraphs and see what they say about the cg tax cuts and how it effected investments. It was NEGATIVE!
And, again, nobody ever said the market didn't affect CG revenues. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth now. You keep saying cg revenues went up after cg tax cuts, that cg tax cuts CAUSED the increase in revenues. Like I said reread it, the part about Newt's point is that tax-shelter conversions of ordinary income into gains to lower their taxes from ordinary income to cg income thereby lowering overall tax revenues.
If you would read the article you will find that it says it lead to overbuilding of office space leading to the savings and load crisis.
Whoever wrote the initial article is obviously having acid trip flash backs.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterfer...rst-president/
Beware the man who would rule you for your own good. He will never cease. He will regulate every aspect of your life, destroy your liberty and enslave you, and sleep well convinced that he has made the world a better place.
Posting Permissions
