Cain says God persuaded him to run for president

[Headholio]

i can't debate the "point" you'v made cause it is such a weak kneejerk desperate attempt to link your Hero with racism in order to paint his detractors as raving KKK members and score another shitty term...

My point was about Republicans lying about tax rates, Obama's policies, socialism etc. The fact that some of those lies are racially motivated is a side issue. You want to divert my point that the Republican contention that Obama has hurt job growth due to "fear of taxes" is absurd.

GW was called such terrible things over his term and I really doubt you gave a fuck about any of them, you probably supported those comments and still do

I only supported the comments that were true.

...what comes around goes around my socialist/kenyan/muslim loving dude

.

Ahh haa!!!

and i bought you a temp plat and zero gratitude, what a waste thanks

Hey thanks for that. I'm not really clear on what the benefits are, but it's the thought that counts, right?
I do appreciate it, but you didn't buy my allegiance. I'm here to bring the facts, that's all!

 

[mrplunkey]

Revenue boomed under Clinton because the economy boomed, under the 39% percent socialist (ha ha) top rate.

Statements like these make me suspect you're just trolling.

Clinton benefited from the Internet explosion which shifted the global productivity curve. And on top of that real shift, it also dumped another $5T in false wealth due to speculation.

I'll concede. If Barry can just unleash another Internet and dump and additional $5 trillion in cash on the economy between now and November, we'd still add jobs at a 39% tax rate. But short of that, a globally competitive US tax rate is probably somewhere around 20% on income and 0-5% on capital gains.

 

[ledhead]

Bwahhh ha ha. What did Kennedy lower tax rates to? Top rate from 91% to 77% !!!

Wrong, he lowered taxes to 60% and it stimulated the economy. The GDP averaged 5.5% from 1961-1963. Inflation averaged 1% during his tenure. production grew 15%, auto sales increased by 40%. he saved the steel industry, which was one our biggest employers and exported commodity, and severed foreign competition, and saved my father's job, thank you very much!!!

Taxes can be too high, and taxes can be too low. It doesn't make sense to argue "raise taxes" or "lower taxes" without context. What I'm doing is calling BS on the Republican lies of 39% top rate being socialistic and a job killer.

You never raise taxes in a economic contraction, ask FDR, he did it, and prolonged the Great Depression. You want facts: in 1933, when FDR was sworn in, unemployment was 25%. In 1939, six yeas after he implemented the New Deal (the greatest socialist plan in US history) unemployment was 20% because he raised the top bracket to 79% to pay for the New Deal. He raised taxes, so he could pay for his social plans just like this joker is trying to do.. so yes, when you raise taxes to pay for social plans it is Socialism, and it is a job killer..

You want to listen to dead Presidents, here's a more appropriate quote; Ronnie Reagan on the rich paying their fair share.

Reagan--No Loopholes For Millionaires - YouTube!

Revenue boomed under Clinton because the economy boomed, under the 39% percent socialist (ha ha) top rate. It totally disproves the republican BS. The argument is not that raising taxes causes growth, Its simply that raising taxes isn't proven to kill growth, and the healthiest economies in our history had higher and more progressive tax rates.

Lol @ the healthiest economies in our history had higher and more progressive taxes. WRONG AGAIN. Our two greatest economic expansions were in the 1920s and the 1980s. Both grew under a economic term called "Laffer Curve," meaning, top to bottom tax cutting. In 1920s, the highest tax bracket was beween 18-20% the lowest was 0.5%. Consequently, there was 3% unemployment through the 1920s and 1% inflation. Real wages grew 30% through the 1920s, that means, wages went up and inflation went down, in a reult of that people had more money. What happens when people have more money? They spend more, which is crucial considering our economy is driven by 70% consumerism, contrary to what some people think.. Per capita income grew 30% during the 1920s (the standard of living increased).

In a result of the Coolidge prosperity, Henry Ford, who I believe is the best American business man ever save Edison slashed prices on his Model T in half because they were in demand because people had money, that is how real business men work. Do you see how the "Business Cycle" is supposed to work.. the Model T had such a high demand---Ford had to do mass hiring---creating more jobs... Under the the Coolidge tax cuts for the wealthy, revenue rose from $77 million to $230 million. The National Debt was $22 billion in 1923, Coolidge had it lowered to $17 billion by 1928. The Federal Budget was $5 billion in 1921 was reduced to $ 3 billion in 1928... Here is the best stat at of them all, because of slashing taxes by 1927 98% Americans paid NO taxes at all...LOLOLOLO. Here is some more, the tax burden for people who made under $10,000 year fell from $130 million in 1923 to under $20 million in 1928....lololol some more...

And the contention that Capital gains tax rates had anything to do with economic boom of the 90's is wrong. Capital gains tax under Clinton went up in 90 and 93, and down in 97.
The point is simply that Republicans refusal to compromise on revenue and taxation is obstructionist and an effort to harm America for political gain.

Wrong again, the boom in the 90's was a result of Reaganomics, which he slashed "capital gains from 70% to 28% creating 21 million jobs, the average salary was 24k a year equivalent to 43K a year in today's standards.. Unemployment dropped from 10% in 1980 to 4% in 1985. Inflation fell from 13% in 1980 to 1% in 1986---again REAL WAGES rose... Interest rates were 12% in 1980, Reagan dropped rates to middle single digits (7-9%), and afforded people to buy houses and vehicles at a reasonable rate, again expanding the economy. Charatable donations in 1980 were $80 billion year by 1988 they were 180 billion a year----what does that tell you??? The American economy grew a third in size under the Reagan tax cuts, producing $15 trillion in wealth, the greatest economic expansion in US history---- in a result, it resonated into the 90's, which two Nobel Peace Prize winners attribute the boom in the 90s to Reaganomics----and yes Clinton did cut "capital gains," because our future president Newt forced him to do it and it expanded the economy...

When the Republicans lowered the top rate to 35% under Bush, they put a 10 year limit on it, saying explicitly that it had to be reviewed in 10 years to insure that the loss in revenue did not result in a debt increase. Republicsns 10 years ago had so much more sense than Republicans today.

Now, I really do not care for JG and he really does not care for me, but he is right and you are sooooo wrong... I have a lot more to share...

 

[PICK3]

“In the world today, we get often told — particularly people of faith — that you leave your faith at the door or on the steps of a public arena, as those that I refer to as the ‘politically correct police’ who say you can’t bring your faith into public arena”

Perry Urges Worshipers to Disregard ‘Politically Correct Police,’ Take Faith Into Public Arena - ABC News

 

[Headholio]

Statements like these make me suspect you're just trolling.

Clinton benefited from the Internet explosion which shifted the global productivity curve. And on top of that real shift, it also dumped another $5T in false wealth due to speculation.

I'll concede. If Barry can just unleash another Internet and dump and additional $5 trillion in cash on the economy between now and November, we'd still add jobs at a 39% tax rate. But short of that, a globally competitive US tax rate is probably somewhere around 20% on income and 0-5% on capital gains.

Making points that go against your paradigm is not trolling. The point is that the economy boomed with higher tax rates. The republicans are a one trick pony. Economy good- cut taxes, bad, cut taxes, revenue down, cut taxes, Taxes bad! Simple minded propaganda that goes against the facts.

Bush cut the top rate for personal income and cut capital gains tax too. Look how well that worked.

 

[PICK3]

Making points that go against your paradigm is not trolling. The point is that the economy boomed with higher tax rates. The republicans are a one trick pony. Economy good- cut taxes, bad, cut taxes, revenue down, cut taxes, Taxes bad! Simple minded propaganda that goes against the facts.

Bush cut the top rate for personal income and cut capital gains tax too. Look how well that worked.

and the Dems are more adaptive and willing to move from their party's lines

 

[Headholio]

Wrong, he lowered taxes to 60% and it stimulated the economy. The GDP averaged 5.5% from 1961-1963. Inflation averaged 1% during his tenure. production grew 15%, auto sales increased by 40%. he saved the steel industry, which was one our biggest employers and export goods, and saved my father's job, thank you very much!!

When I looked it up I found the top rate 1963 at 91% and 1964 @ 77%. I'll find it later. Regardless, thanks for making my point. You are saying the economy kicked ass at 60% tax, then you are also saying that everything the Republicans say about taxes is wrong. Thanks.

You never raise taxes in a economic contraction, ask FDR, he did it, and prolonged the Great Depression. You want facts: in 1933, when FDR was sworn in, unemployment was 25%. In 1939, six yeas after he implemented the New Deal (the greatest socialist plan in US history) unemployment was 20% because he raised the top bracket to 79% to pay for the New Deal. He raised taxes, so he could pay for his social plans just like this joker is trying to do.. so yes, when you raise taxes to pay for social plans it is Socialism, and it is a job killer..

Wrong. This is a complicated issue and not worth debating right now, but stimulus spending got us out of the first republican great depression. there were problems with FDR's policies, especially with the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), which exempted industries from antitrust prosecution if they agreed to enter into collective bargaining agreements that significantly raised wages. Here's a good paper out of UCLA that partially supports your claim about the recovery being delayed, but had nothing to do with tax rates:
FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate / UCLA Newsroom

And the New Deal wasn't the biggest social program ever, World War II was. And it did a great job of turning the economy around.

Lol @ the healthiest economies in our history had higher and more progressive taxes. WRONG AGAIN. Our two greatest economic expansions were in the 1920s and the 1980s. Both grew under a economic term called "Laffer Curve," meaning, top to bottom tax cutting. In 1920s, the highest tax bracket was beween 18-20% the lowest was 0.5%. Consequently, there was 3% unemployment through the 1920s and 1% inflation. Real wages grew 30% through the 1920s, that means, wages went up and inflation went down, in a reult of that people had more money. What happens when people have more money? They spend more, which is crucial considering our economy is driven by 70% consumerism, contrary to what some people think.. Per capita income grew 30% during the 1920s (the standard of living increases).

Who taught you economics? Glen Beck?


The Laffer curve is not about tax cuts. the Laffer curve simply says that there is an optimum point for tax rates which will increase revenue. If taxes increase from the optimum point, then revenue decreases due to a hit in productivity, and if taxes decrease from the optimum point revenue also decreases because it will not result in a productivity increase.

Wrong again, the boom in the 90's was a result of Reaganomics, which he slashed "capital gains from 70% to 28% creating 21 million jobs, the average salary was 24k a year equivalent to 43K a year in today's standards.. Unemployment dropped from 10% in 1980 to 4% in 1985. Inflation fell from 13% in 1980 to 1% in 1986---again REAL WAGES rose... Charatable donations in 1980 were $80 billion year by 1988 they were 180 billion a year----what does that tell you??? The American economy grew a third in size under the Reagan tax cuts, producing $15 trillion in wealth, the greatest economic expansion in US history---- in a result, it resonated into the 90's, which two Nobel Peace Prize winners attribute the boom in the 90s to Reaganomics----and yes Clinton did cut "capital gains," because our future president Newt forced him to do it and it expanded the economy...

Wrong again? Yes you are! Capital gains tax was lowered to a max of 28% under Carter in 1978.

Capital Gains Taxation: From The Encyclopedia of Taxation and Tax Policy

The success of the Reagan era was more related to the creation of a huge deficit (living on a credit card, just like Bush did, without any crying about the fate of our children by Republicans during those administrations ), and Kensyan economic policy to manipulate interest rates. the drop in interest rates from the Carter era is what stimulated the economy. Interest rate policy can't work right now, because rates are as about as low as possible. That's also true for tax rates, so Republicans need to come with a new idea.
But the biggest economic boom in the nations history was under Clinton, not Reagan, even according to right wing Forbes:
Presidents And Prosperity - Forbes.com

You righties are so easy to debate because the only way to defend your position is with made up facts.

 

[PICK3]

So you're sayin we need moar regulation and moar entitlement programs

 

[ledhead]

When I looked it up I found the top rate 1963 at 91% and 1964 @ 77%. I'll find it later. Regardless, thanks for making my point. You are saying the economy kicked ass at 60% tax, then you are also saying that everything the Republicans say about taxes is wrong. Thanks.




Wrong. This is a complicated issue and not worth debating right now, but stimulus spending got us out of the first republican great depression. there were problems with FDR's policies, especially with the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), which exempted industries from antitrust prosecution if they agreed to enter into collective bargaining agreements that significantly raised wages. Here's a good paper out of UCLA that partially supports your claim about the recovery being delayed, but had nothing to do with tax rates:
FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate / UCLA Newsroom

And the New Deal wasn't the biggest social program ever, World War II was. And it did a great job of turning the economy around.




Who taught you economics? Glen Beck?


The Laffer curve is not about tax cuts. the Laffer curve simply says that there is an optimum point for tax rates which will increase revenue. If taxes increase from the optimum point, then revenue decreases due to a hit in productivity, and if taxes decrease from the optimum point revenue also decreases because it will not result in a productivity increase.


Wrong again? Yes you are! Capital gains tax was lowered to a max of 28% under Carter in 1978.

Capital Gains Taxation: From The Encyclopedia of Taxation and Tax Policy

The success of the Reagan era was more related to the creation of a huge deficit (living on a credit card, just like Bush did, without any crying about the fate of our children by Republicans during those administrations ), and Kensyan economic policy to manipulate interest rates. the drop in interest rates from the Carter era is what stimulated the economy. Interest rate policy can't work right now, because rates are as about as low as possible. That's also true for tax rates, so Republicans need to come with a new idea.
But the biggest economic boom in the nations history was under Clinton, not Reagan, even according to right wing Forbes:
Presidents And Prosperity - Forbes.com

You righties are so easy to debate because the only way to defend your position is with made up facts.

Yeah, there is no doubt you are a troll... Thanks for the compliment, I must be really creative to come up with all them stats...

Lol @ your entire post...

 

[Mr. dB]

and the Dems are more adaptive and willing to move from their party's lines

At least we don't have the idiocy and tyranny of the Norquist Pledge.