Cutting taxes sounds great till

[FuelRod]

The first President I have clear memory of his term is Carter.
I'd say Reagan.
Clinton from a domestic stand point really was in the right place at the right time with the dot.com and high tech growth that really had nothing to do with him. On an International scale, he kept things swept under the rug for his 8 years and that dust bunny grew into a monster that we'll be dealing with for an unforseen amount of time.

 

[Two Thumbs]

A tunnel vision thread.

Look at this, but not that.

how retarded do you think we are?

In my life time it's been

Nixon
Ford
Carter
Reagan
Bush sr
Clinton
Bush jr
Obama

I'm to young to judge Nixon. I do recall hating him cuz Saturday morn cartoons were cut to show some kinda court hearings.

Ford was a genuine guy, and might have gone on to greatness had he not pardoned Nixon.

Carter was the worst. Record inflation, gas lines, getting people killed in 1/2 assed attempts to get the hostages back, and not getting them back. And the economy moved like a mule with 2 broken legs.

Reagan was an inspiration to the country. You didn't have to say you were proud to be an American, everyone knew that you were. Traded weapons to get the hostages back. Put gaddafi in a 30 year hole, won the cold war, got the Berlin Wall taken down.

Bush Sr should have put the brakes on what Reagan did for the economy b/c it became doing to the economy. He should have finished off Iraq when he had the chance and told Powel to fuck himself.

Clinton was a disgrace. No Pres brought more shame from misconduct to the WH as he did. To downsize the military he broke contracts and commited discrimination to help him do so. And then stole from the Vets. Clinton was the worste ever.

Bush jr, he was the reason I left the GOP. His main failure was that he thought being straight forward was better than constant propaganda. Proaganda won and the economy tanked.

Obama is trying to out shame clinton by insutling us on the international scale. But he has just under 2 years to pull it out.

No one was best. I have higher standards than to declare anyone of them best. Reagan was better than any on that list, except maybe Ford (don't know enough about him)

 

[Two Thumbs]

actually, Clinton was the best, in my opinion, he got me VA helth care. he Place some of the tax burden on the wealthy, he created jobs. Pussy Bushes did not, and neither did the republicans in Power, when they were, Look at the new "Polici" leader. No jobs , short sighted whine-babby

That's a lie, and a bad one at that.

So the rest of your tripe is dismissed.

 

[Stephanie]

Reagan.

And no one else is even close.

Blind Reagan worship.

I think you guys wanna name airports after him just so you can scream "I'M COMING INTO REAGAN!"

and you guy still have hero worship for a serial adulterer, impeached Billyboy Clinton.

I think you guys wanna name a airport after him just so you can scream, I'm GOING TO cream my jeans coming into Clinton.

 

[noose4]

actually, Clinton was the best, in my opinion, he got me VA helth care. he Place some of the tax burden on the wealthy, he created jobs. Pussy Bushes did not, and neither did the republicans in Power, when they were, Look at the new "Polici" leader. No jobs , short sighted whine-babby

That's a lie, and a bad one at that.

So the rest of your tripe is dismissed.

I think he may be speaking about The Veterans Millennium Health Care and Benefits Act that Clinton signed into law.

 

[Sallow]

Like most folks, my lifetime has been dominated by Republicans. I disagreed with Clinton early and often, but he was surely the best president from LBJ to Bush.

LBJ's domestic policies were great, but he'll never be able to crawl out from under Vietnam. It's a sad stain on his presidency, and Nixons as well.

I hold LBJ as one of the worst because of Vietnam. However Nixon has so much stuff to chose from.

That's the problem with LBJ. Despite all of the domestic policies I'd support, it's hard to look past 25,000 needless American deaths on his watch.

Nixon, of course, had a secret plan to end that war. Little did we know his secret plan was to wait five years and kill 25,000 more people then declare victory and get the fuck out.

Nixon wanted to blow up dikes and kill over 250K people. How's that for shock and awe. But collectively, Johnson and Nixon were responsible for the deaths of millions. And Nixon rubbed every one's face in it by interceding on Lt. Calley's behalf. A man responsible for the deaths and rapes of hundreds of people.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Reagan was the best salesman and worst president. He must have truly believed plutocracy is the best form of government. His act was geared to increase the wealth of the wealthy and used charm and guile to convince the working men and woman that his policies would 'trickle' down.
Next worst the Bushes. Daddy called out Reagan in the presidential nominating days before the 1980 election, calling Reagan's economic plan "voodoo economics" but tossed aside his integrity when he accepted the offer to be VP. Bush II was fully unequipped to be POTUS, he allowed the far right to manipulate him and attack Iraq while cutting taxes. Our nation will suffer this fool for generations.
The Best? JFK as a leader who instilled real patriotism in Americans - not the faux type in vogue today; Bill Clinton and Al Gore for having intelligence, vision and compassion - characteristics lacking in Reagan and the Bushes; and Harry Truman for plain speaking, firm leadership - integration of the military, the Marshall Plan and kicking MacArthur's ass.

 

[Bern80]

But by asking that, whether you say you know it or not, you're assuming the purpose of business is to benefit other people, thus leading you to conclude that if a business is not benefitting society it should be taxed more. Again I really don't see how taking more money from a business is beneficial to society either. The only way to believe that is to believe that government will do more good things with that extra money it's taking. THAT in turn asssumes a few things; that whatever government spends money on is beneficial to society AND that government trying to do more and more for society is really what is in societies best interest. And I have never believed absolving people of the repsonsibility of providing for themsleves what they are able to provide for themselves in societies best interest. Because human nature says most peope who don't really have to do something, won't, which will lead to weakening the society over all.

No, I'm not assuming anything. You're twisting my words around to fit your agenda. I said that the purpose of government action is to benefit the country. Government giving businesses tax cuts, in the hopes that such cuts will contribute to job creation, is a government action. If that action does not see the hoped for results, then why should the government continue to do the same thing? I never said anything about absolving people of their own responsibility to take care of themselves. See, YOU are the one assuming things that I'm not saying at all. So many people always have to paint things as suggesting that ANY action by the government must mean advocacy of COMPLETE AND TOTAL GOVERNMENT CONTROL.

If you don't want it done to you, don't do it to others. You have to be aware enough however to understand that if you hold one position it may necessitate that you hold other positions as well.

Why not rescind a tax cut if there is no job creation? Lots of reasons. To force government to be more efficient, live within its means and examine its role in society and thus what it spends money on. While tax cuts in of themselves don't gauruntee job creation (if there's any mistake the right has made it's making that particular campaign promise) it certainly encourages it. The action doesn't change the fact that to hire more people a business needs surplus money. The less surplus they have the less likely they will be to hire more people.

You're right in that the possibility exists that just cutting taxes won't create jobs. But that action isn't one where one can assume that if the action didn't create the desired outcome the opposite action (do nothing or raising taxes) will work.

 

[slukasiewski]

Reagan, he has been the best one in the last 30 years, hands down. He was not like the current pussy we have in office now who is terrified to make a decision. Reagan made a decision and went with it, our current pussy does not wanna leave a print on any decision just so he can have deniablity. What a vagina. This is the best the left has to offer, so sad.

I agree with you 100% on Reagan.

WORST Presidents - by far in my lifetime -

Not in any particular order -

Carter
Clinton + Nixon (tie)
Obama

 

[DiamondDave]

Born while Johnson was in office

Reagan, hands down #1.... and choosing from the rest is like picking from the rotten fruit basket and hoping to pull out a piece halfway decent... Worst is Carter, with ObamiSalami catching up to that distinction very quickly

 

[zzzz]

Who was the best Pres...?

To answer this question you must first define the parameters of the exercise. A President is a figurehead that essentially leads. He cannot introduce legislation, create jobs or other things attributed to them while they are in office. They do have control on foreign policy and this is one area you can rate them on and leadership ability.

Leadership was definitely Reagan's strong-point and a President must be able to lead and on this basis He was the best. He also brought the country out the economic quagmire of the Carter years and the Foreign policy nightmare that Carter got us into.

 

[Bern80]

No one is preventing any class from doing anything. For the love of god stop whining you whining sacks of shit. There is no barrier in the way that is keeping you or anyone else from achieving. There is no assualt on the middle class. No one is stopping them from doing anything. This war on the middle class is the excuse of lazy fucks like yourself.

Well then, I hope you're equally willing to throw out the idea of a war on the rich, too.

Just because one isn't true, doesn't mean the other isn't. The war on the rich is quite observable. The left wing politicians and people on this board spout everyday about how the rich need to pay their fair share and how the rich keep the poor down. There is most definately a war on the wealthy.

 

[Ernie S.]

Jfk.

What qualifies JFK as even a good President? It's unlikely that he would have been reelected, had he not been shot.

 

[Cuyo]

Reagan.

And no one else is even close.

Blind Reagan worship.

I think you guys wanna name airports after him just so you can scream "I'M COMING INTO REAGAN!"

and you guy still have hero worship for a serial adulterer, impeached Billyboy Clinton.

Yes, Clinton had an affair while president. Thanks for pointing that out. It's EXTREMELY relevant to his tenure as president.






oh, and in case you couldn't tell.







THAT was sarcasm.






Idiot.

 

[editec]

Ike

 

[Stephanie]

Blind Reagan worship.

I think you guys wanna name airports after him just so you can scream "I'M COMING INTO REAGAN!"

and you guy still have hero worship for a serial adulterer, impeached Billyboy Clinton.

Yes, Clinton had an affair while president. Thanks for pointing that out. It's EXTREMELY relevant to his tenure as president.






oh, and in case you couldn't tell.







THAT was sarcasm.






Idiot.

ahhhhh, what you can't take SARCASM about one of your own. tsk tsk

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The income tax rate of upper income levels:

1950 - 91%

1980 - 70%

1985 - 50%

1987 - 38%

2004 - 35%

2010 - 15%

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/f...y-june2010.pdf

Your link is dead and those rates are wrong. The top rate right now is 35% and has been since 2002.

 

[Samson]

Ike

I like Ike.



But he was before my time, so I gotta settle for George Bush Sr.

How much more qualified can a person be than to have been VP for 8 years? Not to mention the rest of his vast experience.

 

[Bern80]

Really? Can you please site for all of us where this rule that says the correct morality is to dole out money to everyone evenly regardless of what they contribute to society?

No one in this entire thread has suggested evenly doling out money to everyone or anything like that. But the fact that you believe it, imagine it, is evidence that you've been brainwashed. That thought has been implanted in your pre-conscious and it plainly influences your thinking.

Of course you won't believe it but you're not expected to. You probably don't believe that pre-conscious indoctrination (brainwashing) is a real psychic phenomenon.

Yes actually, you did.

The distribution system, which had functioned very efficiently for decades, was altered by changing the rules.

The solution to the problem is to reinstate the rules and effect an equitable redistribution.

'EFFECT AN EQUITABLE REDISTRUBTION" what else can that possibly mean other than that you believe the distribution of wealth is supposed to even for no other reason than....well.....it just is I guess.

The rules never changed. The lazy fucks of society just don't like them. The rules of wealth distribution are simple; 1)In terms of jobs, the more valuabel your skills, as determined by the market, the more you will earn. 2)whom is indebted to whom. The later is how the wealthy accumulate large amounts of wealth. If you want something that someone else owns, you're going to have to pay them for it.

 

[Bern80]

You just lost an almost good argument by referring to psychic phenomenon.

Why? Don't you consider brainwashing to be a psychic (i.e., psychological) phenomenon? If not, why not?

I think you mean psychological. And if someone actually brainwashed me into thinking my financial outcomes in life are my responsibility then I would thank them a million times over. I pity people like you who were brainwashed into thinking that society owes them something.