I guess that you didn't like the part about bin Laden being dead or that the US would be the world's top oil producer by 2015. Must really make your blood boil that Obummer could do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech77
Printable View
I guess that you didn't like the part about bin Laden being dead or that the US would be the world's top oil producer by 2015. Must really make your blood boil that Obummer could do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech77
I know the truth Salty. I have never said Bush didn't share the blame. But this was not Bush's idea. He was expanding on Clinton's policies.Quote:
Originally Posted by saltydawg
http://www.businessweek.com/the_thre...ons_drive.html
The graph you linked is the same one I posed. It shows that homeownership took off around 1995... 6 years before Bush took office.
Anyway, I hope that you realize that anybody who bought a house before GW Bush became POTUS is probably above water.Quote:
Originally Posted by T1
Shifting gears here, why didn't GW Bush attending the 2012 repub convention while Slick Willie was a main speaker at the dems convention?
Because very few people have been shown the truth... as you have.Quote:
Originally Posted by saltydawg
....and why wasn't McCain and Palin out on the campaign trail every day shilling for Romney? :shocked2:Quote:
Originally Posted by saltydawg
I don't know about McCain, but Palin is considered a far right wing / tea partier. Romney wanted to attract more moderates and she is seen as polarizing. Romney ran a very conservative campaign. He wanted to just be the alternative candidate to what we had the last 4 years. I bet he was shocked that the people gave the last 4 years 4 more years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof!
Regarding Clinton. Do you know how frustrating it is to know the truth and listen to him act like he was the greatest economical president of all time? He said something like, "Obama inherited an economy so bad that I don't think even I could have done any more than he did." I'm sitting there watching this and knowing it was his policies that contributed greatly to the economy Obama inheritied. I bet less than 5% of our population knows that. And Clinton knows they don't know or he wouldn't say something so arrogant.
And then Obama follows with, "Romney's policies are the policies that got us in this mess in the first place. Do you want to go back to that?" And Romney never counters with the truth and he gets his butt kicked because the people don't know the truth. As God said, "My people are destroyed from a lack of knowledge." It's so frustrating!
Obama ran a great ground game that the repubs couldn't match. As far as the repub platform is concerned, they should drop all the anti-choice rhetoric (no business of government anyway) and focus on getting back to middle. Calling Obama a Marxist, Muslim, born in Kenya is absurb, makes the repubs look like a bunch of kooks. So, the repubs should try to be more focus on individual freedoms and be willing to compromise. That pledge that they took not to raise taxes has to be one of the dumbest moves ever.
I wasn't actually arguing that; however, tax revenue can very well increase with an increase in the income tax rate, depending on where on the Laffer curve you start from.Quote:
Originally Posted by T1
What I was actually pointing out is that tax rate cuts do not necessarily lead to higher levels of tax revenue; they can very well result in lower tax revenue. Again, depending on where you are on the Laffer curve to begin with.
I was calling your interpretation "VooDoo economics". If you tell me that cutting income tax rates will always lead to higher income tax revenue, you are probably either lying or are misinformed.Quote:
Originally Posted by T1
If there is a place on the Laffer curve where we can maximize government revenue and grow the economy, we need to try to get there. We don't need to say, "lowering tax rates has always failed in the past" because that is a lie. It doesn't make sense to me that the government can take more money from struggling businesses and that will help. Obama agreed with that 2 years ago when he said, " Normally, you don't raise taxes in a recession, which is why we haven't and why we have, instead, cut taxes." I don't see what has changed in the last 2 years that now makes it OK to raise taxes.Quote:
Originally Posted by nadB
The economy is not in a recession. The budget deficit is unsustainable. The budget gap cannot be significantly narrowed by spending cuts alone. ______________________________________ . You can fill in the blank space.Quote:
Originally Posted by T1
The one thing we know that will increase revenue is economic growth. With economic growth, it doesn't matter if the tax rates are 25% or 75%. I don't see how raising taxes will spur economic growth. I do see how tax cuts can spur economic growth.
If the economy starts to grow despite the tax hikes (like in the Clinton years), we can get more revenue. If the economy does not grow, the increase in tax rates will not produce more revenue. I think Obama is thinking the green energy sector may be the boom that will increase revenue, but I am skeptical.