Posted on 09/08/2010 12:16:21 PM PDT by Michael Eden
I try to deal with a couple of the more egregious lies of the Democrats, and then present the factual history of the Harding and Coolidge tax cuts of the 1920s, JFK's pitch for tax cuts as a means to stimulate revenue and the economy, and the Reagan and the Bush tax cuts.
Hope this helps people looking for the facts.
Sorry it's long.
capitalism=the unequal distribution of wealth
socialism=the unequal distribution of misery
communism=the equal distribution of misery
Great article. Very well done!
Thank you very much.
I heartily recommend Folsom’s “New Deal or Raw Deal?” other than it makes you angry over how much damage FDR did to our economy and how many lies have subsequently been told by historians to read it.
If anyone wants to forward it along or use it, the formatting on my site is better.
The democrat party wants display their control. They want to show those who have been successful that the democrat party is in control, they want to show they are in control of everyone no matter how much they have been able to succeed on their own in the past. Tax increases are the mating display of the democrat fascist party. They feel sure that by showing off their ability to take away what other have that they'll attract sufficient mates to retain their control indefinitely.
Forget about reality and the economic effects of taxes. They have nothing to do with the democrat obsession with raising taxes.
Regards
“pay for tax cut” is just code for “not cut government spending”
even Boehner’s freeze spending for two years is about him having election leverage in two years. He must think he has the leadership post wrapped up.
Wheeee! cut taxes another 50 % Borrow the money from China. Wait, china not buying any more? Borrow it from domestic banks. Soak up that credit. Borrow more money to “create” jobs. Soak up more credit.
Crank economics.
Deficits don’t matter!
We will grow out of the deficit.
What about paying off the debt incurred? don’t mention that! The Fed will save us!
They are. They just won't say it because they think you are too dumb to figure out they are lying about not wanting to raise your taxes
I used to hear folks say that the Bush Tax Cuts only helped the rich, to which I would reply that the Bush Tax Cuts only help those that pay taxes.
Unfortunately, the most common response was mental vapor lock.
It sounds like you misunderstand the fundamental idea: allowing people to keep the money they earn gives them the incentive to risk their wealth via investment.
The lower my taxes, the higher my incentive to earn, the harder I work and invest.
Andrew Mellon proved that tax cuts more than pay for themselves. And only economic models that are static (i.e., assume that human behavior does not change when confronted with giant tax rates) doesn’t recognize that.
The other thing is that tax cuts are only part of fiscal responsibility. I gave the analogy of a millionaire making huge big ticket purchases: was it his million dollars that put him into debt, or was it his spending?
Democrats are destroying us on both ends: they have racked up ten times (literally) the deficits of Republicans, and at the same time they want to throttle economic growth with high taxation.
It's been about control. Always has been, always will be.
The fascists calling themselves democrats do not care whether or not tax increases reduce revenue, or whether or not tax decreases increase revenue...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
You are entirely correct; Democrats DON’T care.
High taxation is about Marxist class-warfare and Marxist redistribution of wealth, and it is about THEIR power to control others and then sustain their power by offering what amounts to bribes to vote for them.
And I also agree that you can’t reason with diehard Democrats. Facts and truth are irrelevant to them. I remember being in my church, and the chairwoman of the Women’s Republicans invited a woman to attend a Republican luncheon. It was as though a demon took over; I mean the change in her eyes and face was unreal. And she said, “My HUSBAND was a Democrat! I’ll die a Democrat!!!” Those were her exact words. I’ll never forget.
But you CAN reason with the independents and undecideds. And if we reason with them, we can marginalize Democrats before they turn us into “the Dodo bird nation.”
Mr. Eden the argument has never been about revenue, not really.
It’s been about control. Always has been, always will be.
- - - - - - - - - -
You’re right (in the sense that I just acknowledged in my immediately previous comment) and you’re wrong.
For Democrat politicians and diehard Democrat voters, you’re right. That’s what the issue is really about.
But you don’t hear them making that argument. You don’t hear them on ABC saying, “We need to have high taxes so we can control the people and impose our agenda, and then force people to vote for us to get the next new benefit.”
You hear them making the argument that the tax cuts create deficits, or that they are “unfair.”
We have to respond to the argument they’re making in the public sphere, and prove that it isn’t true, in order to take back control from Democrats.
We have to show that they are factually wrong, and then we can begin to examine their evil motives.
a consistent Democrat opposed to “deficit-hiking tax cuts for the rich” should be for raising YOUR taxes as much as possible
“They are. They just won’t say it because they think you are too dumb to figure out they are lying about not wanting to raise your taxes”
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
As we speak, Democrats are saying that we should “cut taxes” for 95% of Americans, but raise taxes on the rich.
Which is to say that they are most certainly NOT being consistent. They are being demagogues and they are most definitely being INCONSISTENT.
Now, I myself said the following in this article:
“For what it’s worth, Democrats will only maintain the massive contradiction of “tax cuts for the rich raising the deficit” for so long. Obama already admitted he was willing to go back on his promise to raise taxes on the middle class. And his people are already looking to tee off on middle class tax hikes.”
I even provided links to demonstrate what I was saying is true.
But that isn’t now - NOW they’re being inconsistent. That’s for after they fool the voters with lies and maintain their power. Unless we convince the public what liars and scoundrels Democrats are and retake our government before they ruin the country.
I used to hear folks say that the Bush Tax Cuts only helped the rich, to which I would reply that the Bush Tax Cuts only help those that pay taxes.
Unfortunately, the most common response was mental vapor lock.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Even Republicans in leadership positions are mostly incapable of arguing that tax cuts - even for the rich - help the economy.
It seems correct on its face to argue that the higher the taxes, the more money the government collects.
But it ISN’T true, and NEVER has been true.
In actuality, the rich simply put their money into tax shelters to protect their wealth, and actually pay LESS taxes. And meanwhile, the sheltered income isn’t creating jobs. So the government gets less money, and fewer jobs get created.
When you invest, you are taking a risk. And if you can’t get a sufficient reward for taking that risk, you won’t take it. And wealth and jobs don’t get created.
The simplest way to put it is to ask how many jobs have been created by poor people. The answer is ZERO.
Let’s say I’m poor and have a great idea for a new product. What has to happen next? Rich people have to decide to back that idea, so that the product can be produced and tested and marketed. And every step of the way, you need to have wealthy people who take a risk seeking profits.
And as a matter of simple fact, the more you tax the rich, the fewer risks they can take.
And your alternative is the federal government - which is taking in less money anyway due to the wealthy sheltering their money - proceeding to make one stupid decision after another which pisses away money that COULD have been put to better use had it stayed with the people who earned it in the first place.
We need to repeal the 16th amendment and take the power of direct taxation away from them
bookmark
and a question. The tarp spending, supposedly repaid (probably some has been). Where does that show up in the budget? Was it ‘credited’ towards 2k9, 2k10, or is it just slush in Obama’s stash?
Well, we’ve got the same basic ideas. So our argument is probably more a matter of semantics.
I would argue that when they demand tax cuts for the middle class, and tax hikes for “the rich,” they are in fact being inconsistent.
If tax cuts for the rich hike the deficit, then so do tax cuts for everybody else. And if they were actually “consistent,” then they would either support tax cuts across the board, or tax increases across the board (yes, that means you, poor and homeless dude).
In point of fact, if the Democrats are actually worried about “deficits,” and if they actually believe that tax cuts create deficits, then they should demand tax increases across the board.
Otherwise they AREN’T being consistent at all. At least, not in the sense that I am describing.
and a question. The tarp spending, supposedly repaid (probably some has been). Where does that show up in the budget? Was it ‘credited’ towards 2k9, 2k10, or is it just slush in Obama’s stash?
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Someone else likely has a more complete explanation for this.
But in general, once a huge spending bill like this gets passed, what happens is that the money shows up in the budget as it actually gets spent (the nice way to say ‘pissed away’) in each fiscal year.
Further, Bush spent about half of the $700 billion TARP, and left the other $350 million for Obama, which will show up in the budget as it is spent.
Now I’VE got a question:
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Politics/story?id=8127005&page=1
The chief IG for TARP says the government may well end up spending $23.7 TRILLION under TARP if loans don’t get paid, etc. Given that “only” a trivial $700 billion was authorized by Congress, where in the world did the other $23 trillion come from???
“What a GREAT Article” BUMP!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.