Page 56 of 71 FirstFirst ... 646515253545556575859606166 ... LastLast
Results 1,101 to 1,120 of 1405
  1.    #1101  
    Actually, the lower taxes and "trickle down" was tried once. It worked! (of course those on the tax the rich bandwagon will never agree that it worked) It gave us the largest peace time growth the economy ever had. Inflation was controlled and more people had jobs. With more people employed tax revenues actually went up! Before Reagan we had double digit unemployment and inflation was out of control. The path to our current economy started when George "read my lips" Bush raised taxes.

    It started to improve when Clinton lowered taxes and started paying off the debt. The Bush part 2 and Obama came along and as a very famous person said in a debate: "There you go again"
    Last edited by Technologic 2; 11/17/2009 at 02:43 PM.
  2. #1102  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    You give this man far too much credit.... and for what? What exactly has he done, daThomas? Spare us the soaring rhetoric and catch words/phrases like "hands on approach to guide the Country" and "hit on all cylinders approach to stabilize the economy", and tell us what he's actually done. SNL nailed it a few weeks back. He's done nada (besides kiss some major ***** overseas - I think that's failing too, btw).
    I already pointed to the Retail numbers either in this thread or another in a direct response to this same question by you and you ignored it. You don't want to give this administration credit for keeping our economy from going off the cliff and actually turning around in less than a year. So if you're not going to give credit for that than it's obvious this administration can do no right in your eyes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    The money we spent on the cold war forced the Soviet Union to collapse financially trying to keep up. Talk to a few east Berliners recently?
    That's debatable and it has been and is still debated. And it was still corporate welfare regardless.
  3.    #1103  
    Quote Originally Posted by glorifiedg View Post
    But you cant depend on peoples good will. You have to construct bases for a better society, dirst with mandatory rules.
    PLEASE read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand
    and
    We the Living by Ayn Rand

    (Now I've done it, let the flames begin )
  4. #1104  
    Quote Originally Posted by Technologic 2 View Post
    Actually, the lower taxes and "trickle down" was tried once. It worked! (of course those on the tax the rich bandwagon will never agree that it worked) It gave us the largest peace time growth the economy ever had. Inflation was controlled and more people had jobs. With more people employed tax revenues actually went up! Before Reagan we had double digit unemployment and inflation was out of control. The path to our current economy started when George "read my lips" Bush raised taxes
    Come on. Reagan blasted the deficit through the roof with his corporate welfare. And I'll put that Carter unemployment figure in context by reminding people of the energy crisis.
  5.    #1105  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Come on. Reagan blasted the deficit through the roof with his corporate welfare. And I'll put that Carter unemployment figure in context by reminding people of the energy crisis.
    Since when is letting companies keep some of the money they earn welfare? Are you actually defending the Carter administration? Energy Crisis? Arab Oil Embargo? What party thinks we should stop depending on foreign oil? (and I don't mean we should all switch to peddling bikes and stop using toilet paper)
  6. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1106  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    I already pointed to the Retail numbers either in this thread or another in a direct response to this same question by you and you ignored it. You don't want to give this administration credit for keeping our economy from going off the cliff and actually turning around in less than a year. So if you're not going to give credit for that than it's obvious this administration can do no right in your eyes.
    Retail numbers... I didn't ignore it, I dismissed it's relevance because I couldn't connect it to any Obama driven policy or legislation that may impacted it. Could you please clear that up for me? I must be over looking something....

    ... or ...

    Could you entertain the possibility that the economy can have positive signs in spite of Obama? (clearly, unemployment isn't one of these indicators that you've been watching)

    That's debatable and it has been and is still debated. And it was still corporate welfare regardless.
    .... debatable? It's debatable by who? I lived it, daThomas. I saw it. I watched tent cities spring up all around the bigger cities with out of work professionals and their families... neighborhoods emptied out.... Reagan came in and slashed taxes, and things got better, people got their jobs back. What the heck do you mean "debatable"?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  7. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1107  
    Another thing... whats this term "corporate welfare"? As if a "corporate" is some evil hulking beast. Corporations employ MILLIONS of people in this country. Corporations "are" people. Corporations are the jobs we need. Yeah, from that view, they did need some "welfare". And they got it, and we went back to work.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  8. #1108  
    Quote Originally Posted by Technologic 2 View Post
    Since when is letting companies keep some of the money they earn welfare?
    Please review your history, he didn't just lower taxes, he dumed tax dollars into the military/industrial private market.

    Quote Originally Posted by Technologic 2 View Post
    Are you actually defending the Carter administration? Energy Crisis? Arab Oil Embargo?
    I'm defending nothing, just putting your number in context.

    Quote Originally Posted by Technologic 2 View Post
    What party thinks we should stop depending on foreign oil? (and I don't mean we should all switch to peddling bikes and stop using toilet paper)
    Which party thinks we should stop depending on oil?
  9. #1109  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    debatable? It's debatable by who?... Reagan came in and slashed taxes, and things got better, people got their jobs back. What the heck do you mean "debatable"?
    Um yea, I was referring to the massive private military spending bringing down the Soviet Union.
  10. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1110  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Which party thinks we should stop depending on oil?
    It's not a party thing. At least, it shouldn't be. Both parties are for alternative sources of energy. Most of the debate seems to be around whether or not we should drill through the forehead of some caribou to get to it, i.e., drill domestically vs buy foreign.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  11. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1111  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Um yea, I was referring to the massive private military spending bringing down the Soviet Union.
    Please excuse my ignorance. I don't understand your reference to "massive private military spending". What is that exactly?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  12. #1112  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Please excuse my ignorance. I don't understand your reference to "massive private military spending". What is that exactly?
    Boeing, McDonnel Douglas, etc.
  13. #1113  
    Quote Originally Posted by Technologic 2 View Post
    PLEASE read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand
    and
    We the Living by Ayn Rand

    (Now I've done it, let the flames begin )
    I've read the "Atlas Shrugged" and its a fictional diystopia that worth very little in comparison to another dystopias like Orwell's "Animal Farm"...
  14. #1114  
    Quote Originally Posted by Technologic 2 View Post
    Since when is letting companies keep some of the money they earn welfare? Are you actually defending the Carter administration? Energy Crisis? Arab Oil Embargo? What party thinks we should stop depending on foreign oil? (and I don't mean we should all switch to peddling bikes and stop using toilet paper)
    But it would be a great idea if you stop doing bad cars and start buying only EU and JP ones (more flames LOL)

    Perhaps, just with that chang you'll reduce the consumpsion of oil by 20% or something
  15. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1115  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Tax cuts work, but for the short term economic improvement only--nearly all economists agree with that.

    The problem is GWB kept the tax cuts over a much longer period of time, not leading to much economic growth after a short spurt at the beginning. At this point, cutting taxes won't lead to a sudden growth that the last set of tax cuts didn't.

    As for Reagan, he cut taxes, but he filled in the funds by borrowing up a storm--we went from being the biggest creditor nation to the biggest debtor nation under him. He funneled those borrowed funds into the weapons making to create jobs (a war economy without a war). When that spending stopped, we went right into that recession of the 1980's. Sure, the weapons build up helped end the Soviet Union--along with the fact that the USSR had faked much of its economic stability all long--but it almost brought us down too.

    Obama is using the Great Depression here and the Recession in Japan as guides--when the government pours money into the economy, it gets money flowing again. If you stop prematurely (as happened in the Great Depression and in Japan), you dive right back into a recession.

    Hoover tried cutting taxes and spending less. The Depression got worse. FDR relied on Keynesian economics, spent alot, and got the economy moving again.
    Wow, you have it so wrong, zelgo. How can you twist history so flagrantly?
    FDR's "New Deal" didn't pull us out of a decade of depression, WWII did.

    And the 80s recession was already in full swing when Reagan first got into office in 81. He pulled us out.

    Wow... please fact check before you post.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  16. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1116  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Boeing, McDonnel Douglas, etc.
    Ahh, gotcha. More evil corporations. Right.

    daThomas, who else should we have gone to to build our weapons? China?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  17. #1117  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    It's not a party thing. At least, it shouldn't be. Both parties are for alternative sources of energy. Most of the debate seems to be around whether or not we should drill through the forehead of some caribou to get to it, i.e., drill domestically vs buy foreign.
    Are they? I've saw an interview to one Republican Senator about is newly created associassion that was named something like "Proud owner of a big poluter" and was exclusive for those who own cars that consume over 15 litres/100km!!!
    Last edited by glorifiedg; 11/17/2009 at 03:36 PM.
  18. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1118  
    Quote Originally Posted by glorifiedg View Post
    Are they? I've saw an interview to one Republican Senator about is newly created associassion that was name something like "Proud owner of a big poluter" and was exclusive to people that own cars that consume over 15 litres/100km!!!
    lol! that knucklehead! Dang those Republicans!
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  19. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1119  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    The party line is America, with its massive military spending, singlehandedly brought down the USSR. The truth is that the military spending was a part of it, but the USSR was having lots of trouble financially to begin with. Gorby (and other leaders) knew they had to consider other financial models. Once their financial vulnerability was revealed, all the Soviet Republics, most of whom hated Russia anyway, agitated to break up and become independent. The USSR, broke, couldn't hold on to its empire.

    The USSR is like a 5- Act play. Reagan shows up in the last act and helps tip it over--but to give Reagan all the credit is re-writing history.
    classic... just classic
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  20. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #1120  
    I just realized that zelgo omits the word Socialists when he talks about the ruskies. He did say USSR at least. Thanks for bringing the discussion full circle though. Socialism doesn't work. We should look to the Soviets, and their economic model, as evidence.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.

Posting Permissions