Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 11/13/2012 11:19:39 PM PST by ExxonPatrolUs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: annieokie

An.other one


2 posted on 11/13/2012 11:23:57 PM PST by antceecee (Bless us Father.. have mercy on us and protect us from evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: annieokie

Another one


3 posted on 11/13/2012 11:24:14 PM PST by antceecee (Bless us Father.. have mercy on us and protect us from evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

Daily Beast??? Come on!!!


4 posted on 11/13/2012 11:29:23 PM PST by tallyhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

George W. Bush killed Reaganomics with his New Tone in Washington and Compassionate Conservatism.


5 posted on 11/13/2012 11:31:06 PM PST by Moonman62 (The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

Idiot. The Kennedy Tax Rate Cuts cut the top rate from 90% to 70%. The top rate in 1974 was 70%.

The rest of this thing is a tissue of lies and tendentious adjectives.


6 posted on 11/13/2012 11:41:57 PM PST by Arthur McGowan (If you're for sticking scissors in a baby girl's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

Michael Tomasky sounds like an economics moron.

No economist ever espoused anything called “trickle down economics.” The point about taxes is that they affect the incentives people have to invest their wealth. High taxes encourage the wealthy to protect their wealth in havens, or buy tax-free bonds; they discourage the wealthy from investing in productive enterprises that have higher risk but which also create jobs in the process of earning them a return.

Additionally, if you’ve read about “Hauser’s Law”, you’ll note that irrespective of how high tax rates are, government always gets about 20% of GDP. Tax rates don’t affect how much revenue goes to government, but they do affect the size of GDP: lower tax rates correlate to higher GDP; higher tax rates with lower GDP. Therefore, by raising tax rates, government actually gets less revenue because it’s getting 20% of a smaller economic pie.

A few months ago, Thomas Sowell wrote an interesting essay on the myth of “trickle down economics”, which you can access here:

http://www.tsowell.com/images/Hoover%20Proof.pdf


7 posted on 11/13/2012 11:42:06 PM PST by GoodDay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs
Oh, so that's why Africa is doing so much better than the US! It's because there's so much more demand there! Why wasn't this obvious before?
8 posted on 11/13/2012 11:43:50 PM PST by sourcery (If true=false, then there would be no constraints on what is possible. Hence, the world exists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

the idea that government must invest in the middle class and not the rich. It’s middle-out economics instead of trickle-down, and it won last week and will keep on winning.
*******************************
Oh yeah, a real winner. That is until the middle class and the poor are sitting equally miserable waiting on their health care. Begging for a treatment that can’t be justified financially

We can watch the waiting room TV with all the altruistic liberals flying off to have have their medical care elsewhere or watch them sipping champagne and talking about all the good they do for the little people.

Not much will change for the rich... although they may bless us with a few sighs of pity. The media can take photos and document our misery, so that they may win some coveted prize or whatever.


12 posted on 11/14/2012 12:01:07 AM PST by Irenic (The pencil sharpener and Elmer's glue is put away-- we've lost the red wheel barrow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

moochernomics


13 posted on 11/14/2012 12:06:14 AM PST by ari-freedom (It's the bennies, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

The economic doctrine of Freeshit won.


15 posted on 11/14/2012 12:46:16 AM PST by FlyingEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

The economics of Santa Clause doesn`t “win” a strong economy, because like all forms of crony capitalism, it systemically picks winners and losers.

But it wins elections, because Americans like getting free stuff in their hands. They don`t give two sh*ts about the long-term ramifications of high unemployment, low wages and lessened expectations, because... well... they got some free stuff.

Striving for the long-term prosperity rewards through hard work and perseverance is seen as a last-century value ... anachronistic and at 180-degree odds with the gimme-summa-dat mentality of today.


16 posted on 11/14/2012 2:20:34 AM PST by ScottinVA (I've never been more disgusted with American voters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

Government “investment” was initially a euphamism for increased taxes. Oh, the Dems would like to increase tax RATES on the wealthy, to nail the coon skin on the barn for subsequent election campaigns, but they won’t realize any more revenue. We are so far beyond the maximum effective tax rate that an increase in tax rates is only going to further decrease economic activity. That leaves 2 alternatives: Printing Money (Ben Bernake) and increased borrowing to fund the “Grand Canyon” of budget shortfalls. (If we had a budget).


22 posted on 11/14/2012 3:10:05 AM PST by Tallguy (Hunkered down in Pennsylvania.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

Obama won by 9.5 m in ‘08; currently ahead by 3.5 m. He lost 2/3 of his margin governing as he did. Plus, this really was the triumph of his community organizing “skills(?)” turning out 10,000- 0 precincts. Apparently the “white youth vote “ caught on to the corruption of identity politics, can only hope the Asian vote won’t be far behind.


23 posted on 11/14/2012 3:15:01 AM PST by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

Why do we let the free enterprise system be labelled “capitalism” or “trickle down.”

BECAUSE WE LET THE LEFT DEFINE US.


25 posted on 11/14/2012 4:05:03 AM PST by SC_Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

You can’t kill truth. You can, for a time, suppress it, or hide it, or distort it - but you can’t kill it.


26 posted on 11/14/2012 4:26:35 AM PST by zencycler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

What “middle out”???

Them there “middle” went to China under Clinton.


27 posted on 11/14/2012 4:42:30 AM PST by Flintlock (PARANOIA--means having all the facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

Tomasky, like all lib-leftists, is an ignoramus and a tremendous liar. Lib economics, based on socialist command-type economics, have always been huge failures. “Trickle down” economics is a lie cooked up the typical lib-leftist suspects like Tomasky. Everybody benefits from lower across the board rate cuts. Everybody loses when taxes are raised.


28 posted on 11/14/2012 6:13:24 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

1. There is no such thing as “trickle down economics” and these liberal commentators know it.

2. Romney was not preaching Reaganomics. (They know that too.) Reagan was promising large tax cuts across the board. All Romney promised was not to raise taxes.

3. As this propagandist knows, supply side was not rejected. It was not on the ballot.

4. Obama may have prevailed in the vote, but that just means Obamanomics will collapse sooner. The people want growth and all Obama will give them is stagnation. Then they’ll want some pro-growth policies.

5. Romney is a liberal Republican who increased the size of government in Massachusetts. He governed the way that liberals would like to see us governed, so he could not be an effective spokesperson for the limited-government, pro-growth, market-oriented viewpoint.

What this dishonest, partisan propagandist is trying to do is preclude real, pro-growth economic views from even being advanced. It won’t work.


30 posted on 11/14/2012 7:13:28 AM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

"It depends on what the meaning of 'invest' is."


37 posted on 11/14/2012 10:27:36 AM PST by Jeff Chandler (www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ExxonPatrolUs

Notice how Communism never dies and the Left is even applauding the impending Soviet Reunion.


38 posted on 11/15/2012 10:41:12 AM PST by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson