"1.) JFK gave the rich their biggest tax cut. Followed by Reagan." That's partially true. But it is misleading. "2.) Prosperity followed both tax cuts and we were lifted from recession" The US was in a very mild recession in the early 1960's, and the Kennedy tax cuts set off a boom in stock speculation. Reagan's tax cuts produced no immediate results at all. Unemployment remained high and even rose through 1984. Prosperity only returned on 1985 after Saudi Arabia announced that it was no longer propping up the OPEC oil price, and oil prices collapsed. "3.) Real Median incomes soared as a result" This is false. Real median incomes did not soar after the Reagan tax cuts. Median incomes did increase somewhat. But the distribution of that increase was skewed heavily toward the top 5%, a phenomena that would be repeated with the Bush tax cuts. "4.) Republicans pushed all tax cuts since then of any importance" So? Tax cuts are the GOP' s only economic solution to anything. They are not really interested in cutting spending. Every GOP tax cut since 1980 has been financed by borrowing. "5.) Democrats have pushed all tax hikes since then of any importance." I guess you were asleep when George HW Bush was in the White House. "6.) Obama recently enacted the largest tax increase against the middle class since FDR's massive middle class tax hike. Which has to be absent from your graph. Apparently the only count cuts, and not hikes too, or all your numbers show a raise in everyone's taxes across the board." This is false. The Obama adminstration had enacted a temporary cut in FICA and FUTA taxes. This was set to expire, and it did. Nothing is quite as blatanly hypocritical as watching right wingers yell about the Social Security Trust Fund, and then turn around and attack the Adminstration for not keeping a temporary tax cut in place that was drastically underfunding it. It's hypocritical, but it's typical. "8.) Leftists will show dumb graphs that mean nothing and were compiled as a result of partisan hackery and a good dose of dishonesty. Do not fall for them." We don't need to do that. You do. "9.) You are not counting the rise in excise taxes again, mostly pushed by Democrats, like Obama's big $1 on ea. pack tax hike, and the other $1 hike he is trying to get passed. Those disproportionally effect the middle and lower income groups." Document that claim. "10.) Reagan got tax brackets for everyone tied to inflation. That has saved the middle class billions as inflation moved people up in nominal but not real income. You can't be counting that to get your numbers." That is true.
I would assign some mistaken decisions to Reagan but he was not a big government fascist at heart. Any person who becomes a politician willing to work within the established system will leave office with a tainted record. But in my opinion Obama is a fascist who sees no limit on what government can do to fulfill the liberal agenda. He may see limits to what he can get away with and how far he can go but no limit in principle.
Dick Armey is one of Washington's most openly corrupt influence peddlers. He came in with the Gingrich/Nordquist/Abramoff crowd, a group devoted to pay to play politics and influence peddling. He rode the Gingrich revolution to it's inevitable demise and them became one of the architects of the Clinton impeachment, which was a political disaster for the GOP. Thanks to deft maneuvering on his part, Gingrich wound up holding the bag for a campaign that Armey pushed hard. Armey left Capitol Hill for K Street after 2002. His first stop was DLA Piper, a prominent K Street firm which also employs Tom Daschile. But his real effort was devoted to a Koch brothers front, Citizen's for a Strong Economy. This group was split into FreedomWorks, which basically is a front for Armey, and Americans for Prosperity, which the Koch's still control. FreedomWorks has been a front group for K Street activists from the very beginning. It was the go to place for pre packaged phony grass roots campaigns, and acted as teh catylist for the GOP tea party campaign of 2009. It controls two of the most prominent national tea party groups, Tea Party Express and Tea Party Patriots. Armey was nearly the victim of the campaign's own success. Armey, like the GOP itself, would up hostage to the lunatic fringe that it was trying to incite with the tea party campaign. Through deft maneuvering, he cashed out for $8 million, leaving the "grass roots" to pick up the tab. Oddly, wingnuts frequently defend folks like Armey who scam them like this.
It is entirely true if you judge by numbers, it is only partially true if you mean by subjective meaning. Immediate results...he got a recession like Obama's and interest rates were higher and instead of calling it a success when wages went down, GDP growth was below 2% and employment participation hit 30 year lows, he called it a success when we had fast GDP growth, interest rates were slashed, and employment started on a trajectory that would later peak under Clinton but not because of him. Also, real median income grew. They grew at the fastest rate they have in 50 years, with the exception of after welfare reform. How much faster would they have had to grow to be "soaring" then. Lets just agree that Reagan, and Gingrich welfare reform reforms had a great positive affect on personal median income. Can we agree there? When an economy does good it is always the rich who get a bit more, they are the ones driving the economy in the first place. YOu would expect that if you weren't a Democrat. Better to borrow at below inflation rate (thanks right wing economics for making that possible) and let the people keep their money, then take it from them. They can grow the economy faster then the government can keep up usually, but now the government has gotten smart and slowed the private sector down with big regulations. That will show those successful corporation and all their millions of employees who is boss. Besides, there is no year since WW2 ended that we wouldn't have a surplus if it weren't for the New Deal and war on poverty. Not a single year without big surplus. Surely, you don't blame all these social programs the Republicans fight on the GOP do you? Oh, Democrat light. Who ran Congress at the time? You can keep the guy who called letting people keep their money "voodoo economics". He is all yours. Yes, but he added Obamacare. That is the largest tax increase to the middle class in history. The Supreme Court says so, it works like one, and the word tax is thrown around a few hundred times in the document. There is no Social Security trust fund, that is a myth. It gets IOUs from the regular tax pool, there is no difference then it just being paid from the regular tax pool. No difference at all in mechanism. Soc Security is just another way the Democrats have been screwing the working man out of a better retirement. In simple stock indexes everyone retiring today who paid into Soc Sec. would be much richer. That is the worst tax on middle class families. Thank you for reminding me who passed it, and who fights for privatization. Explain the numbers in the current graph please. The new one: http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/10/news/economy/cigarette-tax/index.html The earlier one is codified as the 2009 Federal Tobacco Excise Tax, it was vetoed by Bush originally. Sure is.
Tea Party people don't give a damn about Dick Armey or any other establishment insider. Only partisan "gotcha" specialists like you do. He is part of the problem and just because he has been able to find people to set him up as a front man in a phony store front position doesn't mean his name carries any clout or influence with the people that make up the true Tea Party. Your shouting and pointing is useless except to the degree that it keeps you busy and occupied.
Frankly I am sick of these lefty charts. The fact is the 2012 Tax Payer Relief Act raise the taxes on upper level income people. The data in this chart is designed to fog the real data. "average tax cut" indeed. The Dems already took a giant bite out of the upper level people and now want to take another bite. You want to know why business is not hiring new workers? Look to the taxes and Obamacare. You want to know why there is virtually no recovery of the economy yet? Obama and the Dems kill it at every opportunity.
Why? So he'd be just like the Republican Party? The budget issues are only part of the GOP problem. Their worst enemies are themselves. They've run off most of their moderate members leaving a smaller, more radical Republican Party, but also a weaker and more isolated one. The type of party which would rather lose an election than vote in a candidate who is willing to compromise on issues. This is a Party headed for self-destruction. While they may still win 2016, and depending on how badly Obamacare turns out this Fall/Winter, 2014, the fact remains they are further isolating themselves into insignificance. Even the military, traditionally staunch Republican voters of which I was both for several decades, has moved away from the Republican Party and joined the Independents, a group now larger than the RNC. In the military, membership in the RNC has dropped from a high of 60% in 2004 to 41% in 2010 while the number of military Independents has doubled to 32%. From 2007: http://www.latimes.com/news/la-oe-brooks5jan05,0,3023644.column The last poll, in 2010, showed a further drop: http://www.navytimes.com/article/20100411/NEWS/4110309/Survey-Troops-shift-political-parties - - - Updated - - - Why? So he'd be just like the Republican Party? The budget issues are only part of the GOP problem. Their worst enemies are themselves. They've run off most of their moderate members leaving a smaller, more radical Republican Party, but also a weaker and more isolated one. The type of party which would rather lose an election than vote in a candidate who is willing to compromise on issues. This is a Party headed for self-destruction. While they may still win 2016, and depending on how badly Obamacare turns out this Fall/Winter, 2014, the fact remains they are further isolating themselves into insignificance. Even the military, traditionally staunch Republican voters of which I was both for several decades, has moved away from the Republican Party and joined the Independents, a group now larger than the RNC. In the military, membership in the RNC has dropped from a high of 60% in 2004 to 41% in 2010 while the number of military Independents has doubled to 32%. From 2007: http://www.latimes.com/news/la-oe-brooks5jan05,0,3023644.column The last poll, in 2010, showed a further drop: http://www.navytimes.com/article/20100411/NEWS/4110309/Survey-Troops-shift-political-parties - - - Updated - - - Thank you for more clearly pointing out why the Republicans are losing ground to the Democrats.
GOP obstructionism is a wonderful thing. It is why we have some economy slight up tick. If the Dems had their way entirely I am sure we would have spent ourselves again into a deeper recession.
the Bush tax cuts for the rich were not creating Jobs, they were in place for 10+ years, they did not create jobs the rich only create jobs if the bottom 80% have money to spend, simple economics .
This a comic and childlike argument against the rhetoric of individuals, not anything coherent about conservatism. And that's about as deep as any Krazy Kos Koolaid Kid can get. More of the same with one economic point that defies the current reality. Obamanomics has failed. This is HIS economy. It's epic fail. And again, it's exactly what the clueless absorb from MSNBC. Read anything from Thomas Sowell and offer a coherent rebuttal. I know you can't. .
Hey guy, you won the last election by 3 points. Don't go calling in the band just yet. Republicans win the White House when they act like Republicans. Find me one that hasn't in the last 50 years, and I will find you 2 Democrat losers that acted like the leftists they were.
no the unemployment sucked for the first few years of Obama's reign. Now that obstructionism is causing the spending to slow slightly due to sequester and blocking of some spending, we have some slight normalizqation of the economy including some slight slight up tick of jobs. Very slight.
Which has what to do with the price of BMWs and Teachers Salary? Sure. I'm for all of that. Making school actually difficult might actually yield a result of actual learning. Though, your schools must be pretty easy because all of my classes included that. I went to Manitoba for a year, spent that entire years math class learning how to use the fancy TI-83 calculator for grade 10, got back to Alberta for high school and was forbidden to use said calculator. Which only shows the need for an overarching teaching plan, rather then a bunch of slightly different ones. Quaint, but essentially a hall-mark moment more then anything these days. Most Americans aren't equal anymore, and other then paying lip service to the past, most are more concerned about the new 'Me First' mentality. As for the rest of the world, the US has become an almost parody of those freedoms it once championed. I like how you say in one paragraph that nobody can impose morality, and then impose your morality. Hypocritical much? No, the problems occur when the parents start telling the Schools what should or shouldn't be in the class. Sure, in the book. In this world, educating a kid about the world without judging it seems to equate to 'control' for some.
What you're telling conservatives if they want to keep moderates aka RINO's in the party they should embrace the wipe-every-nose policies of the Democrats. Either way it still amounts to one party rule by liberalism and that doesn't appeal to conservatives either.
Actually when one looks at Obama using private industry and corporations (GM, GE, the health insurance industry, Solyndra, student loans, etc.) to advance his own ideological goals one would be very stubborn and disingenuous indeed not to conclude Obama has been, and remains, an ardent fascist. "Fas·cism [ fá shìzzəm ] 1.dictatorial movement: any movement, ideology, or attitude that favors dictatorial government, centralized control of private enterprise, repression of all opposition, and extreme nationalism" Of course Obama cannot be called an extreme nationalist but on all other counts he is a classic fascist. He has been dictatorial to the degree he has been able to be (simply decreeing the government takeover of GM, for instance, and engineering a bailout and bankruptcy arrangement at odds with legality and precedence) and, short of a coup, he has taken over and shut down opposing voices with the assistance of our quisling press. The truly ignorant would prefer to see Big Government such as Obama Care metastasize until it resembles a giant amorphous blob out of some 50's sci-fi movie absorbing and devouring everything it comes into contact with. Truly frightening how ignorant rants presume to criticize others.
After years of honorable service to his country, John McCain won one election too many. He is now a citizen of DC, not Arizona.
Romney lost, johnmayo, but it's clear why you are confused about both current and past events. I'm sure you considered him a Lefty too.
