Posted on 11/14/2013 8:11:59 AM PST by TurboZamboni
you’ve ever had the misfortune to watch MSNBC or Fox News, you’re probably aware that politics causes people to say some pretty dumb things. But did you know political belief has been scientifically linked to blind irrationality? It’s true: Partisan people will always ignore evidence if it goes directly against their beliefs, no matter how difficult the mental gymnastics involved. Don’t believe me? Here are 10 basic facts guaranteed to send die-hard liberals and GOP stalwarts into a froth of irrationality.
(Excerpt) Read more at listverse.com ...
TEA PARTY
No membership but advocacy.
Items 10, 7 and 6 all misrepresent the facts, or GOP views, or both.
Well, there was that one little bit where most of the other industrialized economies were smoldering ruins at the time. If you wanted a steel plant that was still standing it was likely in Pittsburgh. Also, just about no one actually paid the 90%+ tax rate. There were all sorts of tax tricks to avoid it, but it is far preferable to have a low tax rate and no social engineering hoops to jump through.
That’s Balogny! Wait... That’s exactly Right! Oh, BS! Huh, This proves the media is a bunch of liberal hacks.....
My head hurts. The author is only half right here. But I’m sure that’s what he was going for.
Let’s look at the Roaring Twenties, shall we?
“When the federal income tax was enacted in 1913, the top rate was just 7 percent. By the end of World War I, rates had been greatly increased at all income levels, with the top rate jacked up to 77 percent (for income over $1 million). After five years of very high tax rates, rates were cut sharply under the Revenue Acts of 1921, 1924, and 1926. The combined top marginal normal and surtax rate fell from 73 percent to 58 percent in 1922, and then to 50 percent in 1923 (income over $200,000). In 1924, the top tax rate fell to 46 percent (income over $500,000). The top rate was just 25 percent (income over $100,000) from 1925 to 1928, and then fell to 24 percent in 1929.”
Let me restate my earlier post. The author of the article flat out lies.
The article is based on Polls—and they can change like a weather vane with the wind of public opinion. I don’t think Obamacare is quite so popular now—once the prices have come in—and the lies come out as it was when it was cool to mock ted Cruz and support the President. Polls are not the end all of every subject.
Number 10 (The Public Supports Obamacare) gets the usual support from the majority of people who say “Yea, free stuff”. Now that the bill is becoming clear, far too early for the Democrats’ plan, that support will disappear. I hope for a result far more like the senior citizens chasing down Rostenkowski because they had to pay for a Medicare expansion rather than sticking someone else with the bill.
Whoever wrote this is a moron. I didn’t get past the first three, and won’t ever go to that website again. Mis-statement of positions, facts, polls, etc.
This is about as reliable as Algore’s movie of the same (or close) name. All of his conclusions are flawed. The two times I remember tax rates dropping (under Kennedy and Reagan) income tax revenue sharply increased, for one. Had to throw in the one on media bias (a bone to show he isn’t biased).
I suspect I'm preaching to the choir here, but, folks, we're about out of time to turn this sucker around!!
10, 4 and 2 are standard democrat talking points - who knows why the author thinks democrats ignore them.
That’s what these “list” websites do. It doesn’t matter if anything they list is actually true or not. All that matters is that the articles can be written by anyone with access to google, and they are a cheap and easy way to get click revenue.
If that were true, Kennedy's marginal rate reduction could not have led to economic expansion. Since it did, we have to assume that reductions in real rates lead to economic growth.
As you point out, the claim is untrue. There was a nominal rate over 90% and guess what? NO ONE PAID IT. Instead, they directed their wealth into assets not covered by the income tax. Those shelters protected individual income but reduced investment into areas of the economy that could have used a boost. When Kennedy reduced the nominal rate, formerly sheltered money flowed not just into the treasury, but into previously starved areas of economic growth as well.
Finally, when Kennedy reduced real rates, did Federal income crater?
It did not.
If anything, the historical evidence demolishes the classic Democrat shibboleth that high rates are required for high revenues.
10 -The Public Supports Obamacare
9 - MSNBC Is More Opinionated Than Fox
8 - Liberal Bias Is Real
7 - (Illegal, emphasis mine but implication his) Immigration Is Good For The Country
6 - Higher Taxes Benefit The Economy
5 - Minimum Wage Hikes Cause Youth Unemployment
4 - Conservatives Have Lost The Abortion Debate
3 - Democrats Have Become The Party Of Torture
2 - Conservatives Have Also Lost The Gay Marriage Debate
1 - Obama Is Worse Than Nixon
A load of pablum
He should be hearing from the IRS, NSA,& Homeland Security etc. any minute now.
#11, the biased press put Obama in the White House for a second term with unjust cries of racism and war on women.
#12 the outrage against Bush’s war crimes was as empty as Obama’s partisan outage against Bush for raising the debt ceiling.
10 The Public Supports Obamacare
9 MSNBC Is More Opinionated Than Fox
8 Liberal Bias Is Real
7 Immigration Is Good For The Country
6 Higher Taxes Benefit The Economy
5 Minimum Wage Hikes Cause Youth Unemployment
4 Conservatives Have Lost The Abortion Debate
3 Democrats Have Become The Party Of Torture
2 Conservatives Have Also Lost The Gay Marriage Debate
1 Obama Is Worse Than Nixon
hat “both” parties?
There are only two competing wings of the Party of Government.
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.