Elizabeth Warren Fights Back Against the "Magical Accounting" of Trickle-Down Economics

[The Rabbi]

"Low information" is another failed meme.

It's spot on in your case. You are among teh lowest information people here, constantly unable to produce facts or make coherent explanations.

 

[Sarah G]

"Low information" is another failed meme.

It's spot on in your case. You are among teh lowest information people here, constantly unable to produce facts or make coherent explanations.

I do to people who appreciate the effort. You don't matter to me tho.

 

[rightwinger]

Liz Warren has done a great job redefining the agenda on our economy

She reaches out to working Americans and shows them where their money is going and why they should not be content accepting the short end of the stick

Meanwhile, Republicans counter by telling workers how lazy they are

 

[Dad2three]

Bonus question: Why did Kennedy feel the need to propose a tax cut if the economy was doing so well?

It is funny. These Libards love Kennedy, however he believed it was better for the people to spend the money they earned rather than the government.

If you want to see big time denial just raise this issue with the Libtards.

Tax Cuts in Camelot?


JFK lowered taxes, but supply-siders wrongly claim he's their patron saint.


"The Revenue Act of 1964 was aimed at the demand, rather than the supply, side of the economy," said Arthur Okun, one of Kennedy's economic advisers.
This distinction, taught in Economics 101, seldom makes it into the Washington sound-bite wars. A demand-side cut rests on the Keynesian theory that public consumption spurs economic activity. Government puts money in people's hands, as a temporary measure, so that they'll spend it. A supply-side cut sees business investment as the key to growth. Government gives money to businesses and wealthy individuals to invest, ultimately benefiting all Americans. Back in the early 1960s, tax cutting was as contentious as it is today, but it was liberal demand-siders who were calling for the cuts and generating the controversy.

When Kennedy ran for president in 1960 amid a sluggish economy, he vowed to "get the country moving again." After his election, his advisers, led by chief economist Walter Heller, urged a classically Keynesian solution: running a deficit to stimulate growth


JFK the demand-side tax cutter.


Why are cons ALWAYS on the wrong side of history US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Sarah G]

Liz Warren has done a great job redefining the agenda on our economy

She reaches out to working Americans and shows them where their money is going and why they should not be content accepting the short end of the stick

Meanwhile, Republicans counter by telling workers how lazy they are

And that they aren't important for their business to succeed. They're only low paid manual labor.

 

[Dad2three]

Bonus question: Why did Kennedy feel the need to propose a tax cut if the economy was doing so well?

It is funny. These Libards love Kennedy, however he believed it was better for the people to spend the money they earned rather than the government.

If you want to see big time denial just raise this issue with the Libtards.

JFK cut the upper tax rate from 90% to 65%

Are you supporting JFKs 65% tax rate?

Are you supporting deductions for interest payments and income averaging,which benefit high income earners?

 

[Flash]

JFK cut the upper tax rate from 90% to 65%

Are you supporting JFKs 65% tax rate?

So you believe in JFK's philosophy?

If you do then you should not be a Democrat because Democrats hates these ideas.

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.

“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.”

– John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill


Read more at John F. Kennedy on taxes

 

[Dad2three]

[


It is not confiscating wealth. It affects future income

It is not giving more money to the federal governnment, it is putting more money into the hands of workers

You wonder why we call you Moon Bats.

You are not educated enough to understand that taxation is confiscating wealth and income.

You are not educated enough to know that the government doesn't produce anything. It only takes from people that already earned the money and then redistributes it to the lowest unproductive elements of our society.

The government claims it "invests" in the future but all it really does is produce bureaucratic mismanaged bloated entitlement programs that robs the wealth of the country.

It affects the rules of the game

Up till now, the rules have been written to incentivize the capitalists over the workers

Money made from invested is treated differently than money made from labor. Changing the rules levels the playing field. Just because it is not as easy for the wealthy to claim all the income doesn't mean we are taking money away from them

Huh?

"Changing the rules" means imposing punitive taxes on high incomes. The wealthy don't "claim" more income. They earn it. Their income is not a gift from the government. It's the result of entirely voluntary transactions. It was given to them in exchange for some product or service.

They are no more punative than they were under Eisenhower and yet his economy flourished.

Workers earn their money also. Most say moreso than the wealthy. Warren is just advocating that they should keep more of what they earn

This is an old lib trick: Cherry pick one or two data points and make the argument depend entirely on them, leaving aside eerything else.
The Eisenhower economy was also a time when everyone was rebuilding from WW2. Bonus question: Why did Kennedy feel the need to propose a tax cut if the economy was doing so well?

" Why did Kennedy feel the need to propose a tax cut"


"The Revenue Act of 1964 was aimed at the demand, rather than the supply, side of the economy," said Arthur Okun, one of Kennedy's economic advisers.


This distinction, taught in Economics 101, seldom makes it into the Washington sound-bite wars. A demand-side cut rests on the Keynesian theory that public consumption spurs economic activity. Government puts money in people's hands, as a temporary measure, so that they'll spend it. A supply-side cut sees business investment as the key to growth. Government gives money to businesses and wealthy individuals to invest, ultimately benefiting all Americans. Back in the early 1960s, tax cutting was as contentious as it is today, but it was liberal demand-siders who were calling for the cuts and generating the controversy.

When Kennedy ran for president in 1960 amid a sluggish economy, he vowed to "get the country moving again." After his election, his advisers, led by chief economist Walter Heller, urged a classically Keynesian solution: running a deficit to stimulate growth


JFK the demand-side tax cutter.


lol

 

[Dad2three]

JFK cut the upper tax rate from 90% to 65%

Are you supporting JFKs 65% tax rate?

So you believe in JFK's philosophy?

If you do then you should not be a Democrat because Democrats hates these ideas.

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.

“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.”

– John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill


Read more at John F. Kennedy on taxes

The immediate boost to the economy was the main goal. In fact, Nixon's economic adviser Herb Stein noted that the 1964 plan led to a diminished output-per-person-employed—a fact that could argue against the supply-side tenet that lower marginal rates would unleash the productivity of workers deterred from working harder because of overtaxation.


Many liberals disliked Kennedy's plan on grounds of equity.


According to historian David Shreve of the Miller Center for Public Affairs—on whose excellent work I've drawn here—it is from this December 1962 speech that the supply-side appropriators of the Kennedy mystique usually cull their quotations. They skirt the ample documentary evidence showing that the pro-business rhetoric of the Economic Club speech was largely strategic.


JFK the demand-side tax cutter.

 

[Lakhota]

And which party has been in power the last 6 years?

And which party has obstructed critical legislation - like JOBS and Obama's American Jobs Act? Also, unlike with Reagan and Bush Jr. - which party forced reductions in government employment?

 

[The Rabbi]

"Low information" is another failed meme.

It's spot on in your case. You are among teh lowest information people here, constantly unable to produce facts or make coherent explanations.

I do to people who appreciate the effort. You don't matter to me tho.

Translation: I dont know what Im talking about.

 

[The Rabbi]

And which party has been in power the last 6 years?

And which party has obstructed critical legislation - like JOBS and Obama's American Jobs Act? Also, unlike with Reagan and Bush Jr. - which party forced reductions in government employment?

The party of obstruction would be the Democrats, with Harry Reid in the Senate blocking bills right and left.
And guess what, he's still at it, using every dirty trick to obstruct votes on bills.

 

[Papageorgio]

And which party has been in power the last 6 years?

No party has been in power the last six years except both branches of the "protect the plutocrats party".

So Warren is part of the problem.

 

[Dad2three]

You wonder why we call you Moon Bats.

You are not educated enough to understand that taxation is confiscating wealth and income.

You are not educated enough to know that the government doesn't produce anything. It only takes from people that already earned the money and then redistributes it to the lowest unproductive elements of our society.

The government claims it "invests" in the future but all it really does is produce bureaucratic mismanaged bloated entitlement programs that robs the wealth of the country.

It affects the rules of the game

Up till now, the rules have been written to incentivize the capitalists over the workers

Money made from invested is treated differently than money made from labor. Changing the rules levels the playing field. Just because it is not as easy for the wealthy to claim all the income doesn't mean we are taking money away from them

Huh?

"Changing the rules" means imposing punitive taxes on high incomes. The wealthy don't "claim" more income. They earn it. Their income is not a gift from the government. It's the result of entirely voluntary transactions. It was given to them in exchange for some product or service.

They are no more punative than they were under Eisenhower and yet his economy flourished.

That's pretty damn putative. If you want to bring back the same economic conditions that existed during the Eisenhower era you'll have to bomb the rest of the industrialized world into the stone age.

Workers earn their money also. Most say moreso than the wealthy. Warren is just advocating that they should keep more of what they earn

They haven't "earned" anything that isn't the result of a voluntary transaction. Warren intends to impose force into the transaction between employer and employee. That's more akin to the kind of transaction that occurs during an armed robbery.

No moron, force and fear are the elements of an armed robbery, as well as the use of a weapon.

Benjamin Franklin, Founding Father, American diplomat, statesman, and scientist; letter to Robert Morris, December 25, 1783:

"All the property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it."

 

[rightwinger]

JFK cut the upper tax rate from 90% to 65%

Are you supporting JFKs 65% tax rate?

So you believe in JFK's philosophy?

If you do then you should not be a Democrat because Democrats hates these ideas.

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.

“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.”

– John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill


Read more at John F. Kennedy on taxes

I don't know if I would support his 65% tax rate

Maybe 50%

 

[Sarah G]

"Low information" is another failed meme.

It's spot on in your case. You are among teh lowest information people here, constantly unable to produce facts or make coherent explanations.

I do to people who appreciate the effort. You don't matter to me tho.

Translation: I dont know what Im talking about.

I know you don't.

 

[Dad2three]

JFK cut the upper tax rate from 90% to 65%

Are you supporting JFKs 65% tax rate?

So you believe in JFK's philosophy?

If you do then you should not be a Democrat because Democrats hates these ideas.

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.

“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.”

– John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill


Read more at John F. Kennedy on taxes

I don't know if I would support his 65% tax rate

Maybe 50%

NO LOOPHOLES though. Top rate of 70% for $100+ million incomes

 

[Dad2three]

And which party has been in power the last 6 years?

No party has been in power the last six years except both branches of the "protect the plutocrats party".

So Warren is part of the problem.

As far as she hasn't taken an Uzzi to the right wingers obstructing Congress? Yes

 

[rightwinger]

JFK cut the upper tax rate from 90% to 65%

Are you supporting JFKs 65% tax rate?

So you believe in JFK's philosophy?

If you do then you should not be a Democrat because Democrats hates these ideas.

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.

“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.”

– John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill


Read more at John F. Kennedy on taxes

I don't know if I would support his 65% tax rate

Maybe 50%

NO LOOPHOLES though. Top rate of 70% for $100+ million incomes

I never thought I would see our conservative posters advocating a return to such high tax rates for the wealthy

Maybe there is hope for them yet

 

[Sarah G]

JFK cut the upper tax rate from 90% to 65%

Are you supporting JFKs 65% tax rate?

So you believe in JFK's philosophy?

If you do then you should not be a Democrat because Democrats hates these ideas.

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.

“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.”

– John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill


Read more at John F. Kennedy on taxes

I don't know if I would support his 65% tax rate

Maybe 50%

NO LOOPHOLES though. Top rate of 70% for $100+ million incomes

I never thought I would see our conservative posters advocating a return to such high tax rates for the wealthy

Maybe there is hope for them yet

That's because they don't know that is what they are advocating.