PDA

View Full Version : Trump says it all



nAz
07-28-2011, 02:02 PM
Trump...

“The fact is that unless Republicans get 100 percent of what they want — and that may include getting rid of Obamacare which is a total disaster — they should not make a deal other than a minor extension which would take you before the elections which would ensure that Obama doesn’t get elected, which would be a great thing.”

“Absolutely. The Republicans have the leverage. I don’t care about polls. When it comes time to default, they’re not going to remember any of the Republicans’ names. They are going to remember in history books one name, and that’s Obama,”

WOW!

Thank your god for the saneness of Ronald "Jesus" Reagan...

"Unfortunately, Congress consistently brings the government to the edge of default before facing its responsibility. This brinkmanship threatens the holders of government bonds and those who rely on Social Security and veterans benefits. Interest markets would skyrocket. Instability would occur in financial markets and the federal deficit would soar.
"The United States has a special responsibility to itself and the world to meet its obligations. It means we have a well-earned reputation for reliability and credibility -- two things that set us apart in much of the world."

LWW
07-28-2011, 04:06 PM
Did you ever bother to find the quote in it's entirety?

Of course you didn't.

LWW
07-28-2011, 04:07 PM
Here's the part they didn't spoon feed to you"

"For those who say more taxes will solve our deficit problem, they are wrong. Every time Congress increases taxes, the deficit does not decrease, spending increases. It's time for a clear and consistent policy to reduce the federal budget deficit. ... You don't need more taxes to balance the budget. Congress needs the discipline to stop spending more, and that can be done with the passage of a constitutional amendment to balance the budget. ... But I ... will not permit Congress to dismantle our national defense, to jeopardize arms reduction or to increase your taxes. I am determined that will not happen."

nAz
07-28-2011, 04:26 PM
sorry i didn't post the whole speech, i guess i didn't want have to mention that Reagan increased Taxes anyways during his term despite all he said.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

LWW
07-28-2011, 04:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nAz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

sorry i didn't post the whole speech, i guess i didn't want have to mention that Reagan increased Taxes anyways during his term despite all he said.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

</div></div>

Really?

Make your case ... I'll fillet it for you when you are done.

nAz
07-28-2011, 06:07 PM
You know LWW I actually kinda like you But I don't really feel like wasting energy right now to explain to you how Reagan did raise taxes especially when its been explained to you here by others and its pretty much documented all over the net. looking for charts can get tedious.

sh!t even even Reagan own budget director fessed up and admitted it a while back... then again maybe you have some Satan given insight that the guy who was actually at Reagan's side does not have.

I did dig up this paragraph from some website you probably consider moon bat crazy since its not WND /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

"In 1982, the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act, that rolled back about a third of his ‘81 tax cuts, raised corporate tax rates, and to a lesser extent income tax rates. Raised taxes by almost 1 percent of GDP, which at that time was the largest percentage in peacetime increase ever.

[The] 1982 gas tax increase. [The] 1983 Greenspan commission — we know so well; [fellow commission member Alice Rivlin] remembers — we all … raised payroll taxes for lower and middle income households to higher than they were before Reagan’s ‘81 tax cuts. Then there was the 1984 deficit reduction tax.

Those are the big four. Then there was the Railroad Retirement Revenue Act, Consolidated Omnibus Budget of ‘85… ‘85…’87 Continuing Resolution, Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of ‘87, that was $8.6 billion"

But i'm sure Democrats put this all together and Reagan before he went totally senile signed off on it because he understood it needed to be done.


nAz slaying Reagan myths since 2011 lol!

Gayle in MD
07-29-2011, 08:00 AM
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif
Nice to see you back and posting, friend. Say hi to Wendy for me. How's she doing?

G.

LWW
07-29-2011, 09:19 AM
SORRY (http://ntu.org/tax-basics/history-of-federal-individual-1.html) but revisionist history never holds up to even a cursory review.

When Reagan took office the bottom tax rate was 13.825% of the first $2,100.00 of taxable income ... and quickly rose, 69.125% of taxable income above $212,000.00.

The Reagan era tax cuts lowered rates at the bottom to 11% of the $,000.00 og TI and topped out at 38.5% of TI above $90,000.00 of TI.

Although it is true that Reagan cut 2 deals with the demcocrook congress. One allowed the bottom rate to rise to 15% it went all the way up to $32,450.00 and saved the middle class a fortune ... at the top end the rate dropped to 28%.

The removal of many deductions and lowering of rates propelled the US economy and flooded the treasury. In exchange for the higher rates the democrooks promised $3.00 in spending cuts for every dollar of new revenue. What they delivered was $1.50 in new spending for every dollar of new revenue.

Reagan also cut a deal on SSI to buy congress a generation to evolve a long term solution. They did nothing, bringing us to the mess of today.

Much to the left's chagrin, dear leader's own debt commission suggested a de facto return to Reagan era tax policy.

So, the argument can be made that Reagan "RAISED TAXES" only by using the logic that if the cost of a fishing license went up a dime taxes were raised. No regime in US history has ever had a 4 year period where no tax was ever raised anywhere.

The argument can also be made that Reagan raised taxes because the lowering of rates flooded the treasury with revenue.

Taking Reagan's tax policy in their totality ... the leftist myth dissipates like fog Smokey Mountain in the bright morning sun.

Soflasnapper
07-29-2011, 05:08 PM
Nonsense.

When Reagan came in, Carter had already overseen a drop of the top rate to 50% on earned (wage-type) income. The 70% bracket applied only to unearned (non-wage) income. Ordinary Americans work for the money, and do not clip coupons, receive royalties and rents, or make large incomes from dividends, interest on loans they've given, or capital gains.

Reagan's own signature tax plan set the top rate of unearned income to 50%, matching the already existing top rate for earned income. He left it there for 6 years. He saw it was good, and for six years, Reagan rested.

Bradley and Gephardt did the bill to which you refer, after years of opposition to it by the Reagan administration.

Their bill wasn't all roses. While the top rate dropped, the bottom rate increased (as you admitted), by 50% in fact-- 10% up to 15%. Consumer interest stopped being deductible (meaning car loan interest and cc interest), and income averaging for taxing was also lost.

christianshoes
07-29-2011, 07:30 PM
Women High Heels (http://www.womanhighheel.com), from stiletto to spool, spike to platform, girls love their high heels. Season after season, new patterns and styles of high heels hit the sector blazing and girls just keep purchasing these style driven shoes. So, many girls buy high heels and they are so utterly essential in a trendy wardrobe? Woman High Heels (http://www.womanhighheel.com), just like Christian Louboutin Shoe (http://www.womanhighheel.com), Chiristian Louboutin Pumps (http://www.womanhighheel.com), and other Chiristian Shoes (http://www.womanhighheel.com) are suitable for most occasions. From wedding to sultry nights, we have the heels and dreess shoes to create every night a memorable one. If you ever are searching for high heels or fetish shoes. Loboutin Sale (http://www.womanhighheel.com) store here is your place to shop.

LWW
07-30-2011, 04:50 AM
Reinventing history again I see.

Soflasnapper
07-30-2011, 01:47 PM
What can I say to such a comprehensive and convincing take-down as that?

Oh, that you have no point, no rebuttal, no even slight quibble, as to any of these supposed historical revisionist points?

Quite so, because they are all factually correct, and rather blow up your own claims, by every jot and tittle.

Do you provide such lame non-answers to convince YOURSELF, or do you know better, feel ashamed, and hope they will convince OTHERS?

Gayle in MD
07-31-2011, 08:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What can I say to such a comprehensive and convincing take-down as that?

Oh, that you have no point, no rebuttal, no even slight quibble, as to any of these supposed historical revisionist points?

Quite so, because they are all factually correct, and rather blow up your own claims, by every jot and tittle.

Do you provide such lame non-answers to convince YOURSELF, or do you know better, feel ashamed, and hope they will convince OTHERS? </div></div>

Pathological LIARS cannot be reasoned with, particularly when they are immature, and irrational.

G.