Barack Obama vs JFK on taxes: Question for liberals

[Mornac]

• Tweet

Which of these Democrats is right and which is just a babbling idiot?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScMvZinMb6E&feature=player_embedded
	Small | Large

!

[Coke]

Clearly both of those Democrats are right and you're the babbling idiot.

[johnhp]

First of all, Obama cut taxes on over 90% of America.  When Kennedy cut taxes the top marginal rate was 91%, the lowest 20%.  When Kennedy cut taxes the highest percentage went to the bottom bracket rather than the top.  It was the inverse of the republican model.

[Velleity]

Clearly both of those Democrats are right and you're the babbling idiot.

Yes. That's an astute observation.

If "conservatives" like Mornac were objective they would understand the context of Kennedy's argument, which is that there was a 90% tax bracket and tons of big, fat loopholes. Kennedy, being a Kennedy, was well aware of those loopholes and well aware that no one was paying the 90% rate because of those loopholes.

What Kennedy actually proposed, and what was actually implemented posthumously, was not a tax cut for the rich but rather a net tax increase for the rich.

Of course "conservatives" seem to be incapable of objectivity, reason, or honesty. I guess honesty would require them to be "relative", and so honesty is anathema to them.

Hey, did you know that Thomas Paine favored progressive taxation? In 1792 he published Rights of Man, Part the Second, Combining Principle and Practice he spoke in favor of a representative government with social programs aimed at alleviating poverty among commoners and part of his programs included stiff progressive taxes.

Adam Smith too favored progressive taxes, so you could turn this back to Mornac and ask him if he's really an American and a capitalist.

[IM2]

Adam Smith too favored progressive taxes, so you could turn this back to Mornac and ask him if he's really an American and a capitalist.

I doubt if  Mornac knows who Adam Smith is. He may know of grannny smith, but thats only after he eats a piece of pie.

All he did was go find a speech from Kennedy where he said that we must cut taxxes. He did not go into deep analytical study of how Kennedy cut them, which is par for the course relative to conservatives.

Nor has he paid attention to the fact that Obama has actually cut taxes fror most americans, instead he swallows the lies told to him daily by talk radio on how Obama is going to raise your taxes and then take away your freedom because he wants to be a dictator due to the fact that he is a secret kenyan muslim operative who used the Black Panthers in Philly to intimidate voters all over this country to vote for him so that he could install sharia law as part of his dictatorship.

[johnhp]

While we are discussing economics, i read this interesting article this morning.  The research that will follow this should be interesting.

Bartels came to this conclusion by looking at average annual pre-tax income growth (corrected for inflation) for the years 1948 to 2005, a period encompassing much of the egalitarian Great Compression and all of the inegalitarian Great Divergence (up until the time he did his research). Bartels broke down the data according to income percentile and whether the president was a Democrat or a Republican. Figuring the effects of White House policies were best measured on a one-year lag, Bartels eliminated each president's first year in office and substituted the year following departure.

Looking at Bartels' graph is also fascinating:





i can understand why, historically people would want their incomes to grow faster than others, but if this chart acurately reflects income growth, why would anyone support Republicans.  Not only is there the creation of an income divide but even the income for those at the top grows in an appreciable slower manner.

[Velleity]

i can understand why, historically people would want their incomes to grow faster than others, but if this chart acurately reflects income growth, why would anyone support Republicans.  Not only is there the creation of an income divide but even the income for those at the top grows in an appreciable slower manner.

Cognitive dissonance?

I ask myself this question over and over and over. The only conclusion to be drawn here is that a large percentage of our population is both stupid and crazy, like Observer and Ivan.

I also find myself falling back on the old "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people."

[johnhp]

Cognitive dissonance?

I ask myself this question over and over and over. The only conclusion to be drawn here is that a large percentage of our population is both stupid and crazy, like Observer and Ivan.

I also find myself falling back on the old "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people."

This is just cutting off the nose to spite the face.  Sure republicans appeal to cultural issue but they never deliver on these.  Are conservatives just this stupid?

[Coke]

i can understand why, historically people would want their incomes to grow faster than others, but if this chart acurately reflects income growth, why would anyone support Republicans.  Not only is there the creation of an income divide but even the income for those at the top grows in an appreciable slower manner.

Because ideology is more important to the lower Republican caste than money.  The upper Republican caste loves money but has too much of it to do anything constructive with it so they use it to be destructive.  i.e.  At some point you have enough money to buy everything you want but the surplus takes it away from others so you gain power -- and that's where it's at.  POWER.

[ivanm]

Yes. That's an astute observation.

If "conservatives" like Mornac were objective they would understand the context of Kennedy's argument, which is that there was a 90% tax bracket and tons of big, fat loopholes. Kennedy, being a Kennedy, was well aware of those loopholes and well aware that no one was paying the 90% rate because of those loopholes.

What Kennedy actually proposed, and what was actually implemented posthumously, was not a tax cut for the rich but rather a net tax increase for the rich.

Of course "conservatives" seem to be incapable of objectivity, reason, or honesty. I guess honesty would require them to be "relative", and so honesty is anathema to them.

Hey, did you know that Thomas Paine favored progressive taxation? In 1792 he published Rights of Man, Part the Second, Combining Principle and Practice he spoke in favor of a representative government with social programs aimed at alleviating poverty among commoners and part of his programs included stiff progressive taxes.

Adam Smith too favored progressive taxes, so you could turn this back to Mornac and ask him if he's really an American and a capitalist.

Say what you will about conservatives but they can still count. And they know when a sleazy liberal socialist like you and your scumbag fellow travelers come looking for a free lunch.  If you want a dime then go earn yours like I did mine. 

Read your history dumbass.  In WWII it wasn't communist Russia that saved the day but the good old capitalist USA. We wasted more every year that those elistist Marxist fools ever created, and yet you brag ad naseum  about the virtues of socialism and whine incessantly about the evils of capitalism.   Fuck you loser.

[johnhp]

Because ideology is more important to the lower Republican caste than money.  The upper Republican caste loves money but has too much of it to do anything constructive with it so they use it to be destructive.  i.e.  At some point you have enough money to buy everything you want but the surplus takes it away from others so you gain power -- and that's where it's at.  POWER.

It could also be the notion of prestige for the wealthy.  In a certain sense their wealth becomes socially meaningless in an economic compression.

[johnhp]

Say what you will about conservatives but they can still count. And they know when a sleazy liberal socialist like you and your scumbag fellow travelers come looking for a free lunch.  If you want a dime then go earn yours like I did mine. 

Read your history dumbass.  In WWII it wasn't communist Russia that saved the day but the good old capitalist USA. We wasted more every year that those elistist Marxist fools ever created, and yet you brag ad naseum  about the virtues of socialism and whine incessantly about the evils of capitalism.   Fuck you loser.

You do realize this is just irrational bull, right?

[Velleity]

You do realize this is just irrational bull, right?

Of course he doesn't. This dumbass thinks he's smart and he thinks he comes off that way when posts his idiotic, hatefulness.

[bryardi]

Which of these Democrats is right and which is just a babbling idiot?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScMvZinMb6E&feature=player_embedded#!

If Kennedy was right on taxes the way conservatives always say, then let's go back to the Kennedy tax rates. How about that?

[Velleity]

If Kennedy was right on taxes the way conservatives always say, then let's go back to the Kennedy tax rates. How about that?

"Supply-side economics" and the Laffer Curve, in particular, has been debunked every which way to Sunday. Of course that doesn't stop "conservatives" from taking it out of trash been and trying to reuse it to disinform. That's what they do. It's a constant battle to try to keep The Stupid in the trash bin because purveyors of The Stupid have no shame.