Author Topic: JOHN EISENHOWER commentary  (Read 1001 times)

Offline MRPLUTO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 644
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #30 on: October 11, 2004, 01:42:28 PM »
Rip--

I've havn't heard informed critics argue that Bush's tax cuts "have only helped the wealthiest Americans."  But I have heard them say that they disproportionately reward the very richest in America, at a time when the country can't afford it.  There's a big difference between the two statements.

MRPLUTO

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #31 on: October 11, 2004, 01:44:47 PM »
Off Topic Pluto

I thought this thread was about Eisnhower?

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #32 on: October 11, 2004, 01:45:35 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by MRPLUTO
Can any of you actually put together an argument that refutes what Eisenhower has to say?

MRPLUTO



What did he say?

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #33 on: October 11, 2004, 01:47:52 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by MRPLUTO
Rip--

I've havn't heard informed critics argue that Bush's tax cuts "have only helped the wealthiest Americans."  But I have heard them say that they disproportionately reward the very richest in America, at a time when the country can't afford it.  There's a big difference between the two statements.

MRPLUTO


They "disproprotionately" reward the richest?  Did your expert compare the tax breakl ckeck of a multimillionaire to that of a 25K a year earner annd say, see the millionaire got back 200K in taxes but the 25K a year a dude only got back a grand!!  I conclunde the tax cut is EVIL!!!!

Offline FUNKED1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6866
      • http://soldatensender.blogspot.com/
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #34 on: October 11, 2004, 01:48:16 PM »
We have a system where 20% of us pay 80% of the cost of government, and Pluto is talking about how it "rewards" those with high incomes.  Orwellian Newspeak

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18204
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #35 on: October 11, 2004, 01:48:54 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by MRPLUTO
But I have heard them say that they disproportionately reward the very richest in America, at a time when the country can't afford it.  

MRPLUTO


that is where you are wrong..

the country could NOT afford to have NOT given the tax cuts at the time it did ... or the recession would have sweeled into a depression, complete with MASSIVE unemployment, outsourcing, food lines, riots,  etc ...

then again, it would have even been much easier to boot Bush then, right???

what was skerry's/mrs ketchup adjusted tax rate last year?
I've heard 12%
what was Bush's?
heard it was over 30%

who is the scammer here again??
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12770
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #36 on: October 11, 2004, 01:49:55 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by MRPLUTO
Rip--

I've havn't heard informed critics argue that Bush's tax cuts "have only helped the wealthiest Americans."  But I have heard them say that they disproportionately reward the very richest in America, at a time when the country can't afford it.  There's a big difference between the two statements.

MRPLUTO


Yet another similarity between Bush and Reagan. From the same article l posted earlier:

Reagan’s remarkable confidence in his own conclusions about the world--what I call the power of his convictions--was displayed again and again during his presidency. One of my favorite examples, discussed in my book, Ronald Reagan: The Power of Conviction and the Success of His Presidency, is his refusal to raise taxes during the serious recession of 1981-82, even though almost everyone--economists, Democrats, Republicans and his own White House staff--were telling him this was essential in order to enable the country to escape some of the highest unemployment since the Great Depression. The proponents of a tax increase argued in terms of the economic theories of the time--that the deficits projected in the wake of Reagan’s tax cut would keep interest rates high, and this in turn would stifle any economic recovery. But despite these claims, based on the conventional economic wisdom of the era,  Reagan could not be moved. He had come to believe in the little-known and much criticized supply-side theory, and when he believed in something he held it firmly until proven wrong. As everyone now knows, Reagan was not wrong. Despite the deficits, interest rates fell and the tax cuts stimulated a burst of economic activity so powerful that 18 million new jobs were created in the United States in the 5 remaining years of the Reagan administration. In addition,  countries around the world began imitating the U.S. model by privatizing government-held businesses and cutting taxes. Reagan’s convictions changed not only the United States, but much of the rest of world as well.
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27251
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #37 on: October 11, 2004, 01:51:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by MRPLUTO
Rip--

I've havn't heard informed critics argue that Bush's tax cuts "have only helped the wealthiest Americans."  But I have heard them say that they disproportionately reward the very richest in America, at a time when the country can't afford it.  There's a big difference between the two statements.

MRPLUTO


Who pays the most taxes in this country, Pluto?

I've never worked for a poor man myself.

Also, only 3 senators did not vote for the round 4 tax cuts. Democrats included.

http://www.cbpp.org/9-21-04tax-fact.htm

Offline Yeager

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10167
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #38 on: October 11, 2004, 01:55:15 PM »
my brother, who is a university educated consumate professional and a staunch "anybody but bush"  (aka sKerry) supporter has told me in no uncertain terms that the united states needed to have its economy voluntarily truncated, its military voluntarily downsized to a glorified border patrol, its nuclear weapons destroyed and its navy scrapped for metal, all because we have been too successful, too aggressive (we are the worlds only superterrorist state, just look at the atrocity of Hiroshima), and we have polluted the worlds environment with our greed and corporate strength.

These radical positions I believe, are anti-american and equivalent to hard treason and further, deeply held convictions for many sKerry supporters and americans ashamed to be americans, and no doubt shared in no small measure by the candidate himself.

My brother lives in a very nice custom designed house (he is an architect) in a wealthy suburb, drives a 04 Jeep Cherokee and a Volvo wagon, is putting two kids through university and has money left over to go to Hawaii every winter and he wants everyone else to sacrifice away their wealth and greed and says he does his part by donating a percentage of his utility bill to advance the technology of alternate energy and he throws his salmon back into the rivers.

He is a typical liberal, believes strongly in the "anybody but bush" doctrine and no matter how hard I try to convice him, he will not move to canada even though he says its a more advanced society....but I keep trying.

I think what eisenhower had to say was just fine, I read it and Im not swayed by his opinion or his view, there are plenty of people supporting either candidate and no one individual is going to swing me.  I swing myself thanks.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2004, 01:57:20 PM by Yeager »
"If someone flips you the bird and you don't know it, does it still count?" - SLIMpkns

Offline MRPLUTO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 644
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #39 on: October 11, 2004, 01:59:10 PM »
Nuke--

Blame Rip! ;)   Zheesh, he's the one that brought up the misleading quote of who's really making a killing with the tax cuts.  He started it!

I don't know what you mean that I "cut and paste" without ever giving my view.  This isn't about my view, it's about challenging Eisenhower's arguments with something more than sophmoric insults.  Argue with Eisenhower, not with me.

It started with 3 insulting comments by people who didn't like what Eisenhower had to say.  Then there were more insults.  The only serious response to Eisenhower's critcisms has finally come from AKIron, who provided a good quote from the American Enterprise Institute.  Below it is my response.

MRPLUTO

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27251
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #40 on: October 11, 2004, 02:02:22 PM »
FWIW, I was refuting Eisenhowers comments (as MR.Pluto suggested) without using inflammatory comments. :)  Well, not actually refuting, actually agreeing that yes, they are going to benefit those who already pay 90% of the taxes today. Why SHOULDN'T they get a tax break? After all, they pay MOST of the taxes!

Quote
MrPluto:
Can any of you actually put together an argument that refutes what Eisenhower has to say?

Sad that when the level of political discussion is raised by someone like Eisenhower, so many others have to come along and drag it back down again.



The Republicans used to be deeply concerned for the middle class and small business. Today’s Republican leadership, while not solely accountable for the loss of American jobs, encourages it with its tax code and heads us in the direction of a society of very rich and very poor.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2004, 02:04:45 PM by Ripsnort »

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #41 on: October 11, 2004, 02:04:10 PM »
Pluto you are full of it..

We have provided counterarguments on eisenhower jr stances about taxes, foreign policy, enviorment etc etc...  

You just choose to ignore them..  Yea yea go be happy about ike jr all you want, it still doesnt make him correct on the issues

Offline MRPLUTO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 644
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #42 on: October 11, 2004, 02:05:36 PM »
Uh-oh, this thread is breaking up and spinning out of control.

I think if we want to argue about taxes, we should start another thread.

MRPLUTO

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12770
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #43 on: October 11, 2004, 02:09:05 PM »
Eisenhower's speech covered cutting taxes for the rich making taxes germane to this discussion.
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #44 on: October 11, 2004, 02:10:04 PM »
Personal attack
« Last Edit: October 11, 2004, 04:13:45 PM by Skuzzy »