ican711nm
 
  -2  
Sat 29 Jan, 2011 03:45 pm
Federal Receipts increased during the period 1980 – 2010 with a reduction of the maximum income tax rate from 70% to 35% during the same period.

Quote:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2051527/posts
Maximum income tax rates were decreased by a factor of 0.5 from the 70% they were in 1981 to the 35% they have been 2003 to 2010.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/hist.pdf
Federal Receipts during the period 1980 - 2010 increased by nearly a factor of 5.7 from $0.517 to $2.931 trillion.

Federal Outlays during the period 1980 - 2010 increased more than a factor of 5.2 from $0.591 to $3.091 trillion.

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt
Civilian Non-institutional Population during the period 1980 - 2007 increased more than a factor of 1.41 from 168 to 238 million.

Total US Civil Employment during the period 1980 - 2007 increased more than a factor of 1.47 from 99.3 to 146 million.

Total US Civil Employment during the period 2007 - 2010 decreased by more than a factor of 0.95 from 146 to 139 million.


ican711nm
 
  -4  
Sat 29 Jan, 2011 04:10 pm
SAUL ALINSKY trained three of Barack Obama's mentors in Chicago who trained Barach Obama. Barach Obama was hired in 1986 by the Alinsky team to organize residents on the South Side. The proposed solution to every problem on the South Side was distribution of government funds.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAUL ALINSKY TALK

The radical is not a reformer of the system but its would-be destroyer;

The radical is building his own kingdom, a kingdom of heaven on earth;

The revolutionary’s purpose is to undermine the system by taking from the HAVES and giving it to the HAVENOTS and then see what happens;

The most basic principle for radicals is lie to opponents and disarm them by pretending to be moderates and liberals;

"The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution."The stated cause is never the real cause, but only an occasion to advance the real cause which is accumulation of power to make the revolution;

The radical organizer does not have a fixed truth—truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing. He is a political relativist;[/quote]

The standard of the revolution is democracy--a democracy which upends all social hierarchies, including those based on merit;

He builds his initial power base among the underclass and the urban poor by calling to make the last ones first and the first ones also last ones.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GEORGE SOROS TALK

GEORGE SOROS in his 1995 book, page 145, Soros on Soros, I do not accept the rules imposed by others.

Eli Pariser, who headed George Soros's group Moveon PAC, boasted to his members, "Now the Democratic Party is our party. We bought it, we own it."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://sandrarose.com/2009/11/george-soros-plot-to-create-a-new-world-order-through-the-destruction-of-the-us-economy/

George Soros is a multibillionaire whose millions in political contributions financed Barack Obama’s campaign for president.
He is Obama’s biggest benefactor.

In this video, Soros basically tells America to stop resisting a New World Order and is hoping that China will lead the New World Order once the American economy is destroyed.

Highlights from Soros’s TV interview:

“…an orderly decline of the dollar is desirable”

“It’s ill-considered on the part of the United States to resist…”

“It is not necessarily in our interests to have the dollar as the sole world
currency.”

“A decline in the value of the dollar is necessary in order to compensate for the fact that the U.S. economy will remain rather weak…”

“China will emerge as the motor replacing the U.S. consumer..”

“China will be the engine driving (the New World Order) forward, and the U.S. will be actually a drag that’s being pulled along through a gradual decline in the value of the dollar.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BARACK OBAMA is one of the employees of George Soros.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Tea Party Movement is our country’s primary hope of stopping Soros and his employees from turning our federal government into a theft order for destroying our Constitutional Republic and turning us into serfs of a lawless state.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Sat 29 Jan, 2011 04:17 pm
@ican711nm,
I always love your numbers ican..

Would you look at that. The deficit in 2010 was only 160 billion according to what you posted.
I wonder if you really think that is what the deficit was in 2010.

Did you bother to even look the numbers or did you just use the numbers made up by the Bush Administration in 2008 for their 2009 budget?

We are currently in the 2011 budget by the way.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/index.html

In reality, the Federal receipts only increased by a factor of 4.18 from 1980 to 2010(est)
Meanwhile the GDP increased by a factor of 5.368 from 1980 to 2010.
But that fails to allow for you trying to use TOTAL tax receipts while talking about income tax alone.

Individual income tax receipts only went up by 3.83 times from 1980 to 2010.
Meanwhile Corporate income tax receipts only went up by a factor of 2.41

So let's recap.
GDP up 5.368
Individual income tax receipts up 3.83
So we see the effect of the tax cut very clearly in that income tax receipts have not kept pace with GDP growth.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sat 29 Jan, 2011 04:28 pm
@parados,
parados, You should know by now that ican is a static-tician who doesn't understand the numbers he posts. He's like a parrot who can repeat things, but doesn't understand anything of what he posts.
H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Sat 29 Jan, 2011 04:36 pm
The Pope and Obama are on the same stage in Yankee Stadium in front of a huge crowd.

The Pope leans towards Mr. Obama and said, "Do you know that with one
little wave of my hand I can make every person in this crowd go wild with joy?
This joy will not be a momentary display, but will go deep into
their hearts and they'll forever speak of this day and rejoice!"

Obama replied, "I seriously doubt that! With one little wave of your hand....Show me!"
So the Pope backhanded him and knocked him off the stage!

AND THE CROWD ROARED & CHEERED WILDLY!
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Sat 29 Jan, 2011 04:39 pm
@H2O MAN,
That's a real knee slapper!
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Sat 29 Jan, 2011 06:06 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Hey ci.--does everybody you disagree with not understand anything, are ignorant or stupid or all three? Those are three verbal constructions I have seen you use in the last 24 hours as the main point in your posts and I don't doubt there are others on threads I haven't seen in that period. You must have produced thousands of examples of similar nonsense in your time on A2K.

Don't you think it is time you raised your game or admit that your general position is running on the spot?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sat 29 Jan, 2011 06:08 pm
@spendius,
spendi, You miss many of my non-aggressive posts that are give and take on topics that escapes you. Not my problem. You have myopia; not only in the way you live (at the local pub), but because of your limited exposure to real living.
spendius
 
  1  
Sat 29 Jan, 2011 06:13 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You're incurable. It's chronic.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sat 29 Jan, 2011 06:49 pm
@spendius,
Yes, it is! Do you think you'll leave me alone, now?
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Sat 29 Jan, 2011 10:44 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Being on the far left does not necessarily mean that someone is a socialist or a communist or a Communist. Again, I feel you are in a time warp.

After all, this is not 1956.

When you can ask a thoughtful, intelligent question, I will answer it.
ican711nm
 
  -3  
Sun 30 Jan, 2011 12:46 pm
@parados,
Quote:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2051527/posts
PARTIAL HISTORY OF U.S. FEDERAL INCOME TAX RATES
Minimum and Maximum Income Tax Rates 1971 to 2010
...
1971-1981: minimum = 14%; maximum = 70% [CARTER 1977-1981]
1982-1986: minimum = 11%; maximum = 50% [REAGAN 1981-1989]
1987-1987: minimum = 11%; maximum = 38.5%
1988-1990: minimum = 15%; maximum = 33% [BUSH41 1989-1993]
1991-1992: minimum = 15%; maximum = 31%
1993-2000: minimum = 15%; maximum = 39.6% [CLINTON 1993-2001]
2001-2001: minimum = 15%; maximum = 39.1% [BUSH43 2001-2009]
2002-2002: minimum = 10%; maximum = 38.6%
2003-2009: minimum = 10%; maximum = 35%
2009-2010: minimum = 10%; maximum = 35%[OBAMA 2009-2010]

Quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/hist.pdf
Year.......FEDERAL RECEIPTS
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 trillion [OBAMA] as of November 2010

Year.......FEDERAL OUTLAYS
1980.......$0.591 trillion [CARTER]
1988….….$1.064 trillion [REAGAN] average annual increase = 0.059 trillion
1992........$1.382 trillion [BUSH41] average annual increase = 0.080 trillion
2000.......$1.789 trillion [CLINTON] average annual increase = 0.051 trillion
2008.......$2.931 trillion [BUSH43] average annual increase = 0.143 trillion
2010........$3.399 trillion [OBAMA] as of November 2010 average annual increase for 1.917 years = 0.244 trillion

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 November 2010

Year………GROSS FEDERAL DEBT
1980.......$0.909 trillion [CARTER]
1988….….$2.601 trillion [REAGAN] average annual increase = 0.2115 trillion
1992........$4.002 trillion [BUSH41] average annual increase = 0.3503 trillion
2000.......$5.629 trillion [CLINTON] average annual increase = 0.2034 trillion
2008.......$9.654 trillion [BUSH43] average annual increase = 0.5031trillion
2010.......$10.954 trillion [OBAMA] as of November 2010, average annual increase for 1.917 years = 0.678 trillion


Quote:

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt

Year……TOTAL CIVILIAN NON-INSTITUTIONAL POPULATION
** = The years after 2006 when Democrats were in the majority in both houses of Congress.
1980………….............…. 167.745 million [CARTER]
1988……….....+......…… 184.613 million [REAGAN]
1992……….....+.....….… 192.805 million [BUSH41]
2000……….....+.....…... 212.577 million [CLINTON]
2004……….....+.....….… 223.357 million [BUSH43]
2006……….....+.....….… 228.815 million [BUSH43]
2007……….....+.....….… 231.867 million [BUSH43] **
2008……….....+.....….… 233.788 million [BUSH43] **
2009……….....+.....….… 235.801 million [OBAMA] **
2010……….....+.....….… 237.830 million [OBAMA] **

Year……TOTAL US CIVIL EMPLOYMENT
** = Years after 2006 when Democrats were in the majority in both houses of Congress.
1980………….. . .........…….99.302 million [CARTER]
1988……….....+......…… 114.968 million [REAGAN]
1992……….....+.....….… 118.492 million [BUSH41]
2000……….....+.....…... .136.891 million [CLINTON]
2004……….....+.....….… 139.252 million [BUSH43]
2006……….....+.....….… 144.427 million [BUSH43]
2007……….....+.....….… 146.047 million [BUSH43] **
2008……….....-.....….… .145.362 million [BUSH43] **

2009……….....-.....….… 139.877 million [OBAMA] **
2010……….....-.....….… 139.064 million [OBAMA] **

Year.…….PERCENTAGE OF CIVILIAN POPULATION EMPLOYED
** = Years after 2006 when Democrats were in the majority in both houses of Congress.
1980………...........….… 59.2 [CARTER]
1988……….....+.....…… 62.3 [REAGAN]
1992……….....-.....….… 61.5 [BUSH41]
2000……….....+.....…… 64.4 [CLINTON]
2004……….....-.....….… 62.3 [BUSH43]
2006……….....+.....…… 63.1 [BUSH43]
2007……….....-.....….… 63.0 [BUSH43] **
2008……….....-.....….… 62.2 [BUSH43] **
2009……….....-.....….… 59.3 [OBAMA] **
2010……….....-.....….… 58.5 [OBAMA] **

Quote:

http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TablePrint.asp?FirstYear=1965&LastYear=2008&Freq=Year&SelectedTable=5&ViewSeries=NO&Java=no&MaxValue=14412.8&MaxChars=8&Request3Place=N&3Place=N&FromView=YES&Legal=&Land=

Table 1.1.5. GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT (published 2/9/2009)
** = The years after 2006 when Democrats were in the majority in both houses of Congress.
[Billions of dollars]
1976 – 1,825.3 ---------
1977 -- 2,030.9 [CARTER]
1978 -- 2,294.7
1979 -- 2,563.3
1980 -- 2,789.5
1981 –- 3,128.4 [REAGAN]
1982 –- 3,255.0
1983 –- 3,536.7
1984 –- 3,933.2
1985 –- 4,220.3 [CLINTON]
1986 –- 4,462.8
1987 –- 4,739.5
1988 –- 5,103.8
1989 –- 5,484.4 [BUSH41]
1990 –- 5,803.1
1991 –- 5,995.9
1992 –- 6,337.7
1993 –- 6,657.4 [CLINTON]
1994 –- 7,072.2
1995 –- 7,397.7
1996 –- 7,816.9
1997 –- 8,304.3 [CLINTON]
1998 –- 8,747.0
1999 –- 9,268.4
2000 –- 9,817.0
2001 –- 10,128.0 [BUSH 43]
2002 –- 10,469.6
2003 –- 10,960.8
2004 –- 11,685.9
2005 –- 12,421.9 [BUSH 43]
2006 –- 13,178.4
2007 –- 13,807.5
2008 –- 14,208.7 )


Federal Receipts increased during the period 1980 – 2010 with a reduction of the maximum income tax rate from 70% to 35% during the same period. GDP increased each and every year over the same period.

Quote:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2051527/posts
Maximum income tax rates were decreased by a factor of 0.5 from the 70% they were in 1981 to the 35% they have been 2003 to 2010.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/hist.pdf
Federal Receipts during the period 1980 - 2010 increased by nearly a factor of 5.7 from $0.517 to $2.931 trillion.

Federal Outlays during the period 1980 - 2010 increased more than a factor of 5.2 from $0.591 to $3.091 trillion.

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt
Civilian Non-institutional Population during the period 1980 - 2007 increased more than a factor of 1.41 from 168 to 238 million.

Total US Civil Employment during the period 1980 - 2007 increased more than a factor of 1.47 from 99.3 to 146 million.

Total US Civil Employment during the period 2007 - 2010 decreased by more than a factor of 0.95 from 146 to 139 million.
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Sun 30 Jan, 2011 01:12 pm
@parados,
parados wrote:
So let's recap.
GDP up 5.368
Individual income tax receipts up 3.83
So we see the effect of the tax cut very clearly in that income tax receipts have not kept pace with GDP growth.

Yes, the 50% cut in the maximum tax rate (70% cut to 35%) very clearly did not cause the resulting increase in income tax receipts to keep pace with GDP increases.

That should be no surprise! GDP is a measure of the sum of federal spending and private spending. Huge increases in federal spending have caused huge increases in federal deficits and decreases in total U.S. employment. That is of course the result of there being less money available for the private sector to borrow and profit from, and, thereby, maintain its employment levels.

We know that increasing the maximum income tax rate will actually cause further reductions in private employment, because the private sector will have less to spend and invest directly and indirectly in job maintenance and creation.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Sun 30 Jan, 2011 01:25 pm
@plainoldme,
plainoldme wrote:
Being on the far left does not necessarily mean that someone is a socialist or a communist or a Communist. Again, I feel you are in a time warp.

After all, this is not 1956.


Being on the left--far or near--means thinking it's "fair" for government to take money away from those who support themselves, and give that money to those who either do not support themselves, or to people who want more than they actually require to support themselves.

After all, forcing people to support you is theft by you whether it occurs in 1956, 2011, or any other year.
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Mon 31 Jan, 2011 11:12 am
@ican711nm,
Quote:

http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=gross+national+product&x=21&y=8
Main Entry: gross national product Pronunciation Guide
Function: noun
: the total value of the goods and services produced in a nation during a specific period (as a year) and also comprising the total of expenditures by consumers and government plus gross private investment

http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=gross+domestic+product&x=30&y=8
Main Entry: gross domestic product Pronunciation Guide
Function: noun
: the gross national product excluding the value of net income earned abroad -- abbreviation GDP
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  0  
Mon 31 Jan, 2011 01:01 pm
@ican711nm,
So ican, are you standing by your repeating your post that shows a 160 billion deficit in 2010? I am curious what reality you live in.

Let me put in in HUGE letters so you can't miss it, ican.

Do you think the 2010 deficit was $160 billion?
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Mon 31 Jan, 2011 02:48 pm
2-2.
A federal judge in FL has just ruled that the entire health care legislation is unconstitutional because of the provision requiring to join or pay a penalty. A court in VA had previously allowed the legislation to stand if that provision was struck.
Two other courts have upheld the overhaul.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Mon 31 Jan, 2011 02:53 pm
@realjohnboy,
2 to 2

The US Supreme Court will have to ultimately make the call.

Imagine the whole thing getting thrown in the gutter because of the mandate.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Mon 31 Jan, 2011 03:32 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

2 to 2

The US Supreme Court will have to ultimately make the call.

Imagine the whole thing getting thrown in the gutter because of the mandate.


It's actually 2-2-14. 14 other judges have refused to hear the cases or thrown them out when they arrived.

Which really means that the score is closer to 16-2.

Re: the Supreme Court, it is extremely difficult to see how they could rule against HCR without invalidating the logic behind dozens of other - recent - SC decisions.

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 31 Jan, 2011 03:42 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
I agree with the opinion that the SC will have difficulty outlawing ObamaCare. Our country has social security and Medicare, a form of mandate on insurance at the federal level.
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1930
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 09/30/2024 at 08:30:27