Why do you keep overlooking the word core in Euro core? Or do you not know what that is? Let me spell it out for your - the PIIGS nations are known as the periphery. Germany, Finland, Netherlands, Austria are known as the core.
Eisenhower's 92% tax rate
- Thread starter David
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 92% eisenhower rate tax
Why do you keep overlooking the word core in Euro core? Or do you not know what that is? Let me spell it out for your - the PIIGS nations are known as the periphery. Germany, Finland, Netherlands, Austria are known as the core.
Reagan was quite consistent. In a few more years enough time will have passed that I can tell a story about him and nuclear war-fighting. Let's see, 1984 plus 75 years is when, exactly?At the same time, he has been quoted as supporting progressive taxation and showed it in his policy proposals too. But, that's a politician for you
I would love to see some quotes of Reagan supporting progressive taxes. I bet when we examine them carefully he is presenting an alternative designed to make the tax code simpler with less progressiveness and fewer rates.
That is how they are defined. Don't read much Euro news, do you? Part of this has to do with the stark contrast in monetary policy needs and the overall fiscal situations of the two groups.
Socialism also can't be created without a government. So does that mean government is a socialist philosophy? Are you an anarchist? Your logic makes no sense.
Actually mine is fine. Yours appears to be lacking.
It is not my job to educate you, you can Google it
And yet you cannot tell me how much of his time he spent discussing it and defending it as a percentage of the total? Well you are the, ahem, expert. I have only read one pamphlet, watched a speech he gave (it was a bit less than two yours including the questions and answers). But I will go see what I can find.
If it is his basic philosophy I will be surprised if not astonished.
The way I said it is how every news outlet- Fox, CNN, Reuters, Bloomberg, you name it- and most economists and blogs have used those terms since the Greece crisis began. I think you are not realizing that this is the Euro core or Eurozone core.
Reagan and Taxes
This is a longer quote from a speech Reagan made in 1985.
There is nothing in there about soaking the rich. There is no class warfare rhetoric. He does make the case for simplifying the tax code to make it fairer. When Reagan used the words it does not mean the same thing as when the Marxist Obama uses it.
At the same time, he has been quoted as supporting progressive taxation and showed it in his policy proposals too. But, that's a politician for you
This is a longer quote from a speech Reagan made in 1985.
last week I unveiled our proposal to make the Federal tax system fairer, clearer, and less burdensome for all Americans. Now, someone might say it's odd to talk about tax policy with young people in their teens. But I don't think so. You not only understand what taxes are, what effect they have in the average person's life, but if you don't understand, you will pretty soon when you get your first job. I know some of you already have part-time jobs, and I know you keep your eye on the part of the check that shows what Uncle Sam is taking out.
What we're trying to do is change some of those numbers. We want the part of your check that shows Federal withholding to have fewer digits on it. And we want the part that shows your salary to have more digits on it. We're trying to take less money from you and less from your parents.
And whatever you and they do with this additional money will not only help you, it will help the whole country by making our entire economy stronger. Maybe you'll take some of the money and put it in the bank. Fine. You'll earn interest on your savings, and you'll also make more money available for others to borrow, to expand their business, or improve their home. Maybe you'll spend it. And that's fine, too, although I hope you don't spend it all. But what you spend will increase demand for various products. And that will help create jobs. But whatever you do with it, you'll be the one who's doing the doing. You'll make the decisions. You'll have the autonomy. And that's what freedom is.
When taxes are lowered, economic growth follows. And economic growth is good for just about everyone, especially the poor. It gives them a ladder they can use to climb out of poverty. And for those who aren't poor, but who are by no means rich—and that's most of the people in America—economic growth gives them options they never had before. When you and your parents and friends are allowed to keep more of the fruits of your labors, a whole new world of options will open up for you.
You'll be better situated to pay for college. You'll be able to save and pool your money with friends and maybe even start a small local business. I knew a fellow who once bought into a little hamburger stand out west. He was just a regular guy, but he worked hard and advertised, and the little stand prospered. You may have heard of it. It's called McDonald's. I was thinking about Ray Kroc recently and how the jingle that he uses applies to our tax program: "You deserve a break today." And tomorrow, too, and for the rest of your life.
And we're trying to give a break, a much deserved, long-overdue break, to the American family. I'll tell you how strange America's current tax laws are. They allow a deduction of only slightly more than $1,000 for every dependent person in your family. Now, if you think about what it costs for your parents to put food on the table and buy you everything from books to braces, you know that $1,000 doesn't even make a dent in it. We're going to virtually double that exemption to $2,000 with increases if inflation occurs. But it'll go a long way toward encouraging families again and giving your parents the break they deserve.
We're going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that have allowed some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10 percent of his salary, and that's crazy. It's time we stopped it.
And the way I see it, if our current tax structure were a TV show, it would either be "Foul-ups, Bleeps, and Blunders," or "Gimme a Break." If it were a record album, it would be "Gimme Shelter." If it were a movie, it would be "Revenge of the Nerds" or maybe "Take the Money and Run." And if the IRS, Internal Revenue Service, ever wants a theme song, maybe they'll get Sting to do, "Every breath you take, every move you make, I'll be watching you."
What we're trying to move against is institutionalized unfairness. We want to see that everyone pays their fair share, and no one gets a free ride. Our reasons? It's good for society when we all know that no one is manipulating the system to their advantage because they're rich and powerful. But it's also good for society when everyone pays something, that everyone makes a contribution.
After all, we're all citizens, equal in the eyes of the law, and equal in the eyes of God. You're given a lot of benefits when you're born in the U.S.A, but you're given a responsibility, too, a responsibility to do your part and become a contributing member of the American family and an equal partner in America, Incorporated. When you pay your taxes, you buy your shares. And every year you get to vote on who should be on the board of directors.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=38734What we're trying to do is change some of those numbers. We want the part of your check that shows Federal withholding to have fewer digits on it. And we want the part that shows your salary to have more digits on it. We're trying to take less money from you and less from your parents.
And whatever you and they do with this additional money will not only help you, it will help the whole country by making our entire economy stronger. Maybe you'll take some of the money and put it in the bank. Fine. You'll earn interest on your savings, and you'll also make more money available for others to borrow, to expand their business, or improve their home. Maybe you'll spend it. And that's fine, too, although I hope you don't spend it all. But what you spend will increase demand for various products. And that will help create jobs. But whatever you do with it, you'll be the one who's doing the doing. You'll make the decisions. You'll have the autonomy. And that's what freedom is.
When taxes are lowered, economic growth follows. And economic growth is good for just about everyone, especially the poor. It gives them a ladder they can use to climb out of poverty. And for those who aren't poor, but who are by no means rich—and that's most of the people in America—economic growth gives them options they never had before. When you and your parents and friends are allowed to keep more of the fruits of your labors, a whole new world of options will open up for you.
You'll be better situated to pay for college. You'll be able to save and pool your money with friends and maybe even start a small local business. I knew a fellow who once bought into a little hamburger stand out west. He was just a regular guy, but he worked hard and advertised, and the little stand prospered. You may have heard of it. It's called McDonald's. I was thinking about Ray Kroc recently and how the jingle that he uses applies to our tax program: "You deserve a break today." And tomorrow, too, and for the rest of your life.
And we're trying to give a break, a much deserved, long-overdue break, to the American family. I'll tell you how strange America's current tax laws are. They allow a deduction of only slightly more than $1,000 for every dependent person in your family. Now, if you think about what it costs for your parents to put food on the table and buy you everything from books to braces, you know that $1,000 doesn't even make a dent in it. We're going to virtually double that exemption to $2,000 with increases if inflation occurs. But it'll go a long way toward encouraging families again and giving your parents the break they deserve.
We're going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that have allowed some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10 percent of his salary, and that's crazy. It's time we stopped it.
And the way I see it, if our current tax structure were a TV show, it would either be "Foul-ups, Bleeps, and Blunders," or "Gimme a Break." If it were a record album, it would be "Gimme Shelter." If it were a movie, it would be "Revenge of the Nerds" or maybe "Take the Money and Run." And if the IRS, Internal Revenue Service, ever wants a theme song, maybe they'll get Sting to do, "Every breath you take, every move you make, I'll be watching you."
What we're trying to move against is institutionalized unfairness. We want to see that everyone pays their fair share, and no one gets a free ride. Our reasons? It's good for society when we all know that no one is manipulating the system to their advantage because they're rich and powerful. But it's also good for society when everyone pays something, that everyone makes a contribution.
After all, we're all citizens, equal in the eyes of the law, and equal in the eyes of God. You're given a lot of benefits when you're born in the U.S.A, but you're given a responsibility, too, a responsibility to do your part and become a contributing member of the American family and an equal partner in America, Incorporated. When you pay your taxes, you buy your shares. And every year you get to vote on who should be on the board of directors.
There is nothing in there about soaking the rich. There is no class warfare rhetoric. He does make the case for simplifying the tax code to make it fairer. When Reagan used the words it does not mean the same thing as when the Marxist Obama uses it.
I will stick with what I actually know. I have been to Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, England and Austria.
If they are using Eurocore this way perhaps it is an attempt to deceive the low information people of the US. France, Germany, England, and Spain are the core of Europe. Those other piddly countries are interesting but peripheral.
These days I read very little about Europe. I have relatives there. They think it is marvelous. They do not recognize the chains they wear.
It is unimportant other than the instruction it provides. We are on our way to collapse. Other nations, in Europe, have done the things we are doing now. Japan as well had a lost generation who saw no growth as a result of crony capitalism (which, in the final analysis is not capitalism at all).
So when the Marxist, president Obama takes us on that same path it is clear we are doomed. The only issue is how long it will take for us to fall.
Where's Dirk when you need him?
the form misterveritis is talking about*
Even Marx called for the state to transition to communism though.
misterveritis, how do you feel about Reagan signing the Tax Reform Act of 1986 which expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit (which is kind of similar to a negative income tax)?
Also, George Stigler, an economist who I am admittedly less familiar with but would like to read more of, was a big proponent of the negative income tax too and of course he was also a proponent figure in the Chicago school alongside Friedman.
Funny how even the academics you look up to weren't cold-hearted as you seem to be towards the poor, huh? Maybe because they realized the marginal value of money and the divergence in opportunity for the rich vs. the poor.
Also, George Stigler, an economist who I am admittedly less familiar with but would like to read more of, was a big proponent of the negative income tax too and of course he was also a proponent figure in the Chicago school alongside Friedman.
Funny how even the academics you look up to weren't cold-hearted as you seem to be towards the poor, huh? Maybe because they realized the marginal value of money and the divergence in opportunity for the rich vs. the poor.
Given that under Reagan the tax structure became less progressive and simpler I was for it. Are you making an argument for a line item veto where the president can strike those parts of bills he does not personally agree with?
I suppose one can describe theft from one's neighbors in flowery terms if it suits one. Theft remains theft. Even a brilliant man can be wrong on some points. It seems like Friedman was very wrong on these points. I withhold judgment until I have seen the context.
Sometimes people foolishly believe they are protecting conservatism by offering a lesser crime as an alternative to a greater crime by the other party. We all need to learn how to say no. We need to obstruct at every point until nothing will get done that is not to our liking.
Similar threads
