Obama '08?

Reagan had one of the highest tax rates,

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]

cicerone imposter wrote:

Reagan had one of the highest tax rates,

Why is it that you LeftistLiberals distort reality so much?

Quote:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2051527/posts

Year……TOTAL US CIVIL EMPLOYMENT
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]

http://www.deptofnumbers.com/unemployment/us/
US Unemployment History
Date .............National Unemployed Persons
February 2010............. 14,860,000
March 2010............. 14,943,000
April 2010............. 15,138,000
May 2010............. 14,884,000
June 2010............. 14,593,000
July 2010............. 14,637,000
August 2010............. 14,849,000
September 2010............. 14,746,000
October 2010............. 14,876,000
November 2010............. 15,041,000
December 2010............. 14,485,000
January 2011............. 13,863,000
February 2011............. 13,673,000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_U.S._public_debt
Year………GROSS FEDERAL DEBT
1980.......$0.908 trillion [CARTER]
1988….….$2.602 trillion [REAGAN], average annual increase 1980 - 1988 = $0.2118 trillion
1992........$4.065 trillion [BUSH41], average annual increase 1988 - 1992 = $0.3658 trillion
2000.......$5.674 trillion [CLINTON], average annual increase 1992 - 2000 = $0.2011 trillion
2008.......$10.025 trillion [BUSH43], average annual increase 2000 - 2008 = $0.5439 trillion
2010.......$13.562 trillion [OBAMA], average annual increase 2008 - 2010 = $1.7685 trillion

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2051527/posts
Highest and lowest Income Tax Rates 1913 to 2007
Partial History of
U.S. Federal Income Tax Rates Since 1913
Year(s) - .....Lowest Bracket....Highest Bracket.....President
1913-1915 -............. 1%............. 7%............. [Wilson]
1916 -.................... 2%............. 15%
1917 -.................... 2%............. 67%
1918 -.................... 6%............. 73%
1919-1921 -............. 4%............. 73%
1921 -.................... 4%............. 73%.............[Harding]
1923 -.................... 4%............. 56%
1923 -....................3%............. 56%............. [Coolidge]
1924 -....................1.5%............. 46%
1925-1929 -............. 1.5%............. 25%
1929 -.................... 0.375%............. 24%............. [Hoover]
1930-1931 -............. 1.125%............. 25%
1932-1933 -............. 4%............. 63%
1933-1935 -............. 4%............. 63%............. [Roosevelt]
1936-1939 -............. 4%............. 79%
1940 -.................... 4.4%............. 81.1%
1941 -.................... 10%............. 81%
1942-1943 -.............- 19%............. 88%
1944-1945 -............. 23%............. 94%
1945-1947 -............. 19%............. 86.45%............. [Truman]
1948-1949 -............. 16.6%............. 82.13%
1950 -.................... 17.4%............. 84.36%
1951 -.................... 20.4%............. 91%
1952-1953 -............. 22.2%............. 92%
1953-1961 -............. 20%............. 91%............. [Eisenhower]
1961-1963 -............. 16%............. 77%............. [Kennedy]
1963-1967 -............. 14%............. 70%............. [Johnson]
1968 -.................... 14%............. 75.25%
1969 -.................... 14%............. 77%
1969 -.................... 14%............. 77%............. [Nixon]
1974 -.................... 14%............. 71.75%
1977 -.................... 14%............. 71.75%............. [Ford]
1977-1981 -............. 14%............. 70%............. [CARTER]
1981 -.................... 14%............. 70%............. [Reagan]
1982-1986 -............. 12%............. 50%
1989 -.................... 14%............. 38.5%
1989 -.................... 14%............. 38.5%............. [Bush]
...

ican, Back up your claims with detailed evidence/facts - not your silly generalized opinions that are based on ignorance.

ican, You are a funny guy! You post records that shows that GW Bush increased our government 137 million to 145 million civil employees (FYI, that's a real growth in government

Downside of Reagan legacy
June 09, 2004|By David Lazarus

Ronald Reagan may have been a good and decent man.

As president, though, Reagan pursued policies that were short-sighted, reckless and, for many, hurtful. His economic legacy is one of deplorable disregard for the consequences of his actions, and the ramifications of Reagan's decisions remain with us to this day.

I'll focus here on just three issues: soaring budget deficits, homelessness and AIDS.

On the matter of deficits, Reagan nearly tripled the gap between the amount of money the federal government took in and the amount it spent. He did this by cutting tax rates by an average 25 percent, while aggressively increasing defense spending.
Sponsored Links

The World's "Next Oil" Stock Investment With 1,000% Potential Gains. (www.smauthority.com)
The One Must-Own Stock Best Stock To Play The Lithium Boom From Electric Cars. (www.TheStockDetective.com)
Local Coupons 1 ridiculously huge coupon a day. Get 50-90% off your city's best! (www.Groupon.com)

advertisement | your ad here

In 1981, shortly after taking office, Reagan lamented "runaway deficits" that were then approaching $80 billion, or about 2.5 percent of gross domestic product. Within only two years, however, his policies had succeeded in enlarging the deficit to more than $200 billion, or 6 percent of GDP.

"It was an experiment," said Alan Auerbach, a professor of economics at UC Berkeley. "No one before Reagan had ever run such huge deficits during peacetime. He showed that you could smile and tell everyone not to worry and, politically, no one will call you to account."

This lesson clearly wasn't lost on the current occupant of the White House, who has followed the Reagan economic playbook virtually step by step in taking a budget surplus and turning it into a deficit this year of more than $520 billion, or 4.5 percent of GDP.

Runaway deficits

But runaway deficits do have consequences. They can lead to higher interest rates, exacerbate high debt-servicing costs and cause funding to dry up for important social programs, such as education and health care.

Ronald Reagan may have been a good and decent man.[/quote Agreed! Hurrah![quote]As president, though, Reagan pursued policies that were short-sighted, reckless and, for many, hurtful. His economic legacy is one of deplorable disregard for the consequences of his actions, and the ramifications of Reagan's decisions remain with us to this day.

I'll focus here on just three issues: soaring budget deficits,

homelessness and AIDS.

On the matter of deficits, Reagan nearly tripled the gap between the amount of money the federal government took in and the amount it spent. He did this by cutting tax rates by an average 25 percent, while aggressively increasing defense spending.

DEMOCRATS:

QUESTION OF THE DAY -


Cost of Budget Deal to keep Government Up and Running - 39.8 Billion Dollars

Cost of George W Bush Tax Cuts for RICHEST 2% over next 10 years - 690 Billion Dollars


Who wins in this equation and why aren't we getting this message out to the American people?