Where is the US economy headed?

@plainoldme,

Woodrow Wilson was the President during the First World War - No. 28.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States

1 Reply

@talk72000,

Jump up and catch my sarcasm.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

Wilson? Hmmm! Did he succeed 41?

ican wrote:
The problem was greatly accelerated by Woodrow Wilson! GWB along with many of his predecessors merely continued that acceleration. BHO accelerated and is accelerating that acceleration.

THE PROBLEM = EXCESSIVE SPENDING
Theodore Roosevelt--1901--1909-accelerated the problem
William H. Taft--1909-1913--decelerated the problem
Woodrow Wilson--1913-1921--greatly accelerated the problem
Warren G. Harding--1921-1923--decelerated the problem
Calvin Coolidge--1923-1929--decelerated the problem
Herbert Hoover--19291933--decelerated the problem
Franklin D. Roosevelt--19331945--greatly accelerated the problem
Harry S. Truman--1945-1953--decelerated the problem
Dwight D. Eisenhower--1953-1961--decelerated the problem
John F. Kennedy--1961-1963--decelerated the problem
Lyndon B. Johnson--1963-1969--greatly accelerated the problem
Richard M. Nixon--1969-1974--decelerated the problem
Gerald R. Ford--1974-1977--decelerated the problem
James R. Carter--1977--greatly accelerated the problem
Ronald Reagan--1981-1981--accelerated the problem
George H. W. Bush--1989-1993--accelerated the problem
William Clinton--1993-2001--accelerated the problem
George W. Bush--2001-2009--accelerated the problem
Barack H. Obama--2009-2010--very greatly accelerated and is very greatly accelerating the problem

3 Replies

@ican711nm,

ican, my sincere apologies for being away 2 or 3 days, so that you probably caught more derision from libs in my absence? When I am here too, they may divide their attentions somewhat?

0 Replies

@ican711nm,

Quote:

When the Supreme Court misinterprets the Constitution, the effect is to change it to something other than it meant to those who originally adopted it and subsequently amended it.

So.. where does it say the Supreme Court can misinterpret the Constitution ican?
The Supreme Court gets to decide all cases that question the interpretation. There is nothing in the Constitution requiring they decide one way or another. You can make up all the **** you want ican. It's still only ****.

The Constitution does not call taxation theft. Anyone that says taxation is theft is ignoring the US Constitution. You sure like to throw **** at the US Constitution ican. I wonder why you hate the US so much. Your actions clearly show you do.

1 Reply

@ican711nm,

Quote:

James R. Carter--1977--greatly accelerated the problem
Ronald Reagan--1981-1981--accelerated the problem
George H. W. Bush--1989-1993--accelerated the problem
William Clinton--1993-2001--accelerated the problem

That's funny ican.
So Reagan tripled the US debt but didn't greatly accelerate the problem?
Who knew that you would be so biased that you would try to downplay Reagan's debt?

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

I wonder why you hate the US so much. Your actions clearly show you do.

ican loves this country and the constitution. So your statements clearly show you know nothing about what you are talking about or accusing others of.

1 Reply

@okie,

Anyone that loves the US Constitution so much would KNOW that taxation is NOT theft since the US Constitution allows for taxation.

So.. do you think taxation is theft okie?
If you do think it is theft, then kindly point to the law making it theft.

2 Replies

@parados,

It depends upon the purpose of the taxation. If it is done to accomplish income redistribution and it is plainly stated as such by Obama and the Congress for example, I believe income redistribution is basically unconstitutional. There are legitimate functions of government and there are illegitimate functions, and I believe an honest and informed reading of the constitution reveals what those legitimate functions are and what they are not.

Also, you surely remember that the Declaration of Independence sprang out of a movement that talked about "taxation without representation" being grounds for breaking away from Great Britain and establishing a new nation? Are we going to once again succumb to the bondage that we recognized and used as justification for our freedom? We will indeed succumb if there are enough people like you that do not appreciate and defend what this country was founded upon and the guiding principles of the constitution.

2 Replies

@parados,

ican doesn't love America enough to pay his far share. There are a couple of bridges near me that have remained in a state of disrepair since they were constructed, in 1948 and in 1951, through Democratic and Republican administrations. Perhaps, ican would like to come here and work on them as a donation to America.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie, Please provide us evidence of Obama's redistribution of income taxes?
He has approved the stim plan that provides tax breaks, and extended unemployment for those who cannot find jobs - and many are even conservatives who benefit from these legislation.

You are a broken record that has no mind; all you can do is continue to repeat the old conservative canard without thinking.

1 Reply

@okie,

Quote:

It depends upon the purpose of the taxation. If it is done to accomplish income redistribution and it is plainly stated as such by Obama and the Congress for example, I believe income redistribution is basically unconstitutional.

So.. YOU are an idiot just like ican.

There is NOTHING in the US Constitution that states taxes are theft. Anyone claiming taxation is theft, either hates their country or doesn't have a clue about the US Constitution. Since you claim you know so much about the Constitution, it leaves us wondering why you hate the US okie.

Quote:

There are legitimate functions of government and there are illegitimate functions, and I believe an honest and informed reading of the constitution reveals what those legitimate functions are and what they are not.

Taxation is a legitimate function of the government. There is no reading that says taxation is not a legitimate function. Claiming what the money is spent on invalidates the taxation is pure bull **** okie. That would be like claiming what a person says invalidates their right to free speech. It is the height of stupidity.

Quote:

Also, you surely remember that the Declaration of Independence sprang out of a movement that talked about "taxation without representation" being grounds for breaking away from Great Britain and establishing a new nation?

And are you saying you don't have representation?
How stupid do you insist on looking okie. Read the Constitution that you claim to know so much about but clearly don't. You are represented by 2 Senators and on Congressman. That means you have representation.

Quote:

We will indeed succumb if there are enough people like you that do not appreciate and defend what this country was founded upon and the guiding principles of the constitution.

Oh.. you mean if only I lied like you and ican did about what the US Constitution says then we would have a better country?
Frankly okie, I am sick of your "patriotism" that puts you ahead of your country. It is nothing but bull **** that seeks to destroy this country. You and ican are the ones trying to destroy this country by undermining the US Constitution. You need to look at what you are saying compared to the Constituiton.

Taxation is NOT theft. It can't be under the US Constitution since the Constitution authorizes taxation and is the Supreme law of the land.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

You don't remember Obama on the campaign trail talking about "spreading the wealth around?"

1 Reply

@okie,

If that was his message, seems the American voters liked it, and he was elected as our president.

1 Reply

@parados,

ALL THESE DATA CONSTITUTE THE BASIS OF MY ASSESSMENT FOR THE PERIOD INDICATED

Quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/hist.pdf
Year.......FEDERAL RECEIPTS FINAL FULL YEAR OF TERM
1980......$0.517 trillion [CARTER]
1988….…$0.909 trillion [REAGAN]
1992.......$1.091 trillion [BUSH41]
2000......$2.025 trillion [CLINTON]
2008......$2.521 trillion [BUSH43]
2010.......$2,931[OBAMA] (June and not final year of term)

Year.......FEDERAL OUTLAYS FINAL FULL YEAR OF TERM
1980.......$0.591 trillion [CARTER]
1988….….$1.064 trillion [REAGAN]
1992........$1,.382 trillion [BUSH41]
2000.......$1.789 trillion [CLINTON]
2008.......$2,931 trillion [BUSH43]
2010........$3,091 trillion [OBAMA] (June and not final year of term)

Year………FEDERAL DEFICITS
1980.......$0.074 trillion [CARTER]
1988….….$0.155 trillion [REAGAN]
1992........$0.291 trillion [BUSH41]
2000.......SURPLUS $0.236 trillion [CLINTON]
2008.......$0.410 trillion [BUSH43]
2010........$0.160 trillion [OBAMA] (as of June and not final year of term)

Year………GROSS FEDERAL DEBT
1980.......$0.909 trillion [CARTER]
1988….….$2.601 trillion [REAGAN]
1992........$4.002 trillion [BUSH41]
2000.......$5.629 trillion [CLINTON]
2008.......$9.654 trillion [BUSH43]
2010.......$10.954 trillion [OBAMA] (as of June and not final year of term)

Quote:

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt
Year……TOTAL US CIVIL EMPLOYMENT
1980……………..99 million [CARTER]
1988…………… 115 million [REAGAN]
1992…………….118 million [BUSH41]
2000……………137 million [CLINTON]
2007………..….146 million [BUSH43]
2008………….. 145 million [BUSH43]
2009,……….....140 million [OBAMA]
2010.……………139 million [OBAMA] (as of June 2010 and not final year of term)

Year.…….PERCENT OF CIVILIAN POPULATION EMPLOYED
1980…………………………………….59.2 [CARTER]
1988…………………………………….62.3 [REAGAN]
1992…………………………………….61.5 [BUSH41]
2000…………………………………….64.4 [CLINTON]
2007…………………………………….63.0 [BUSH43]
2008…………………………………….62.2 [BUSH43]
2009…………………………………….59.3 [OBAMA]
2010…………………………………….58.5 [OBAMA] (as of June 2010 and not final year of term)

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

ican doesn't love America enough to pay his far share.

What is my fair share of income tax on my taxable income (my taxable income is less than $35,000)
5%?
10%?
15% ?
20%?
30%?
40%?
...
90%?

What is your fair share of income tax on your taxable income?

1 Reply

@ican711nm,

So you are a Nazi with that Swastica avator.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

If that was his message, seems the American voters liked it, and he was elected as our president.

That is the danger of democracies, ci, there is always the risk of the people voting for populists, one example being Hugo Chavez. I am finishing up a book by Alan Greenspan and talked about the dangers of populism and the fact that South American countries have a history of falling prey to it, much to their own detriment most of the time. Chavez would be but one example in South America. I think Obama comes the closest to being a populist political figure here in the U.S., with his change message, spreading the wealth around, and appealing to the so-called downtrodden by reinforcing any beliefs that they may have about getting the short end of the stick, even though it is overblown and exaggerated most of the time. Such politicians have perfected the craft of demagoguery to get where they are.

2 Replies

@talk72000,

talk 72000 wrote:

So you are a Nazi with that Swastica avator.

My avatar consists of the heads of four American eagles. It symbolizes my signature:
All humans are endowed by God with the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But humans forfeit those rights they deny others. Individualists want government to secure their rights. Collectivists want government to equalize wealth.

0 Replies

@ican711nm,

How much do you think I should have paid out of the $19,000 I earned last year. That was my total income: no coupons to clip, no trust funds. For the last three months of the year, I worked seven days a week.

0 Replies

Where is the US economy headed?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know