U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-24-2013, 02:20 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,777 posts, read 12,836,930 times
Reputation: 5648

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
Revenue was flat the first several years, but remember the economy was still terrible until around 1983. Unemployment in fall 1982 was 10.8%. Revenue did grow during the 2nd Reagan term. Inflation adjusted receipts were 1.197 trillion in 1980, and 1.421 trillion in 1988.
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary
So, how can you cavalierly attribute the rise years later to the tax cuts? Other things were also happening, including a growing population, who add to revenues.

Sorry, from the below chart I can't see any compelling evidence that those tax cuts had a positive effect on income taxes.

Government Tax and Revenue Chart: United States 1981-1989 - Federal State Local Data
Rate this post positively

 
Old 08-24-2013, 02:24 PM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,824 posts, read 21,768,806 times
Reputation: 6526
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
AQ is the "boogie man" we use to keep us involved the ME in my opinion. That is how it's sold to the public. In reality it's all about keeping oil traded in US dollars. That is what the evil bankers want and actually need. We are so far gone now if that ever comes close to changing the global economy will cease to exist. We are IMO on the tipping point. Other countries want this to occur so they can "take the lead" so to say. Big "game" going on behind the scenes.
The only problem with your theory is that there is no oil in Afghanistan. al Qaeda was not even on our radar until after the attack on 09/11/2001. Before that Clinton was not interested in stemming terrorism at all, completely ignoring al Qaeda's declaration of war (via Osama bin Laden's Fatwah) against the US, Saudi Arabia, and our western allies in 1998. Before Clinton it was the PLF who was our "boogie man" for killing an American aboard the Italian cruise ship the Achille Lauro in 1985.

As far as our monetary system is concerned, I am not going to even pretend to know what motivates those involved. I do know, however, that Democrats have been undermining US currency since the 1970s by continuously printing more money and devaluing US currency.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-24-2013, 02:31 PM
 
29,409 posts, read 20,515,079 times
Reputation: 5445
Pipeline runs across that country though. Actually to go a point further Afghan is loaded with rare earth elements that are required to keep the ipads and i whatever going along with the windmills and battery cars. That is why China has made a big move towards Africa. One of the reasons anyway. The US only has one rare earth mine open right now and it just opened back up a couple years ago because the greenies shut it down. We will be fighting and bleeding for Ipad batteries and windmills soon instead of oil.

Yeah the PLF were the boogie man back then I do remember. Always gotta have one. I mean in reality there is nobody the US needs to even look at as a threat. We own the air and the sea. Canada has syrup and mexico weed. They aren't going to attack us. To keep the "game" going and the public on the side of our interventions we have to have a boogie man. Obama screwed up when he pretended to kill Bin Laden IMO. It got him a bump but now they need a new one.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-24-2013, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Florida
73,519 posts, read 40,974,428 times
Reputation: 13601
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
Exactly. We don't want that to change and that is why we go "over there" and fight and why we give out what is called as foreign aid which is really just payoffs to whoever we need to pay off. lol

It aint pretty but it's reality. If we don't do it somebody else will and we will be in a world of hurt if and more likely when it changes.
No one else was in position to do it, and still isnt. The Iranian oil bourse was a big threat about 10 years ago, but they were not able to pull it off because the Europeans were not willing to step in to support it. I guess they realized it was not a good idea to rock the boat too much.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-24-2013, 03:01 PM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
23,691 posts, read 30,213,262 times
Reputation: 7232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
It took until 1987 to react the same NOMINAL revenue as was raised in 1981. Adjusting for inflation and population growth, I doubt revenue grew at all. In any case, no serious economist still believe the long dis discredited theory that cutting non-confiscatory tax-rates increases government revenue. By that theory, cutting rates to zero should yield unlimited revenue.
Because of the poor economy Reagan inherited.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-24-2013, 03:02 PM
 
Location: Northridge/Porter Ranch, Calif.
23,691 posts, read 30,213,262 times
Reputation: 7232
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
So, how can you cavalierly attribute the rise years later to the tax cuts? Other things were also happening, including a growing population, who add to revenues.

Sorry, from the below chart I can't see any compelling evidence that those tax cuts had a positive effect on income taxes.

Government Tax and Revenue Chart: United States 1981-1989 - Federal State Local Data
Government revenue also grew after the John F. Kennedy and G.W. Bush tax cuts. It wasn't just a "coincidence." Or due to "other things."

Last edited by Fleet; 08-24-2013 at 03:36 PM..
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-24-2013, 03:15 PM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,824 posts, read 21,768,806 times
Reputation: 6526
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
Pipeline runs across that country though. Actually to go a point further Afghan is loaded with rare earth elements that are required to keep the ipads and i whatever going along with the windmills and battery cars. That is why China has made a big move towards Africa. One of the reasons anyway. The US only has one rare earth mine open right now and it just opened back up a couple years ago because the greenies shut it down. We will be fighting and bleeding for Ipad batteries and windmills soon instead of oil.

Yeah the PLF were the boogie man back then I do remember. Always gotta have one. I mean in reality there is nobody the US needs to even look at as a threat. We own the air and the sea. Canada has syrup and mexico weed. They aren't going to attack us. To keep the "game" going and the public on the side of our interventions we have to have a boogie man. Obama screwed up when he pretended to kill Bin Laden IMO. It got him a bump but now they need a new one.
As far as I am aware, the Afghanistan oil pipeline has only been proposed. There is no pipeline currently, nor has construction even been started. As far as rare-earth elements are concerned, there are a lot more rare-earth elements closer to home than in Afghanistan.

I assume you are referring to the Mountain Pass mine in California's Mojave Desert. There are more than 70 known occurrences of rare-earth elements throughout Alaska alone. Currently we are looking into mining Bokan Mountain/Dotson Ridge on Prince of Wales Island, which is suppose to contain 40 times the heavy rare-earth elements found in the Mountain Pass mine.

Bokan Mountain mining plans discussed at Capitol | Juneau Empire - Alaska's Capital City Online Newspaper

I naturally expect Democrats to completely oppose any domestic development of rare-earth elements. They would much rather have us completely dependent upon China. The more dependent Democrats keep us on foreign sources for our strategic resources, the more "boogie men" they will be able to manufacture.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-24-2013, 03:44 PM
 
Location: Florida
73,519 posts, read 40,974,428 times
Reputation: 13601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
Because of the poor economy Reagan inherited.
He also inherited Paul Volcker and his plan to bring inflation down.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-25-2013, 12:22 AM
 
29,409 posts, read 20,515,079 times
Reputation: 5445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
No one else was in position to do it, and still isnt. The Iranian oil bourse was a big threat about 10 years ago, but they were not able to pull it off because the Europeans were not willing to step in to support it. I guess they realized it was not a good idea to rock the boat too much.
About ten years ago is when we went and took care of business. Iraq and the EU, in particular France and Germany, were given due warning and they decided to cross the US along with the support of Turkey. They sided with Iraq because they wanted the bounty that would come. They lost. End of story. Democrats want to play politics with it all but in the world of reality democrats and republicans and everybody in between agreed to take down Hussain. He was a threat to the monetary system so he went away.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 08-25-2013, 12:26 AM
 
29,409 posts, read 20,515,079 times
Reputation: 5445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
As far as I am aware, the Afghanistan oil pipeline has only been proposed. There is no pipeline currently, nor has construction even been started. As far as rare-earth elements are concerned, there are a lot more rare-earth elements closer to home than in Afghanistan.

I assume you are referring to the Mountain Pass mine in California's Mojave Desert. There are more than 70 known occurrences of rare-earth elements throughout Alaska alone. Currently we are looking into mining Bokan Mountain/Dotson Ridge on Prince of Wales Island, which is suppose to contain 40 times the heavy rare-earth elements found in the Mountain Pass mine.

Bokan Mountain mining plans discussed at Capitol | Juneau Empire - Alaska's Capital City Online Newspaper

I naturally expect Democrats to completely oppose any domestic development of rare-earth elements. They would much rather have us completely dependent upon China. The more dependent Democrats keep us on foreign sources for our strategic resources, the more "boogie men" they will be able to manufacture.
Drilling and getting the stuff is a whole different ballgame than finding the stuff as I'm sure your well aware of. Yes we have the goodies but regs keep us from getting to it thanks to the anti drillers. So we will either have to go fight for it or.........fight the anti drillers in the courts. Last I read China was hoarding the stuff and they are smart to do so. When the cell phones go silent the country will scream for sure. Global economy is what they wanted. lol
Rate this post positively
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:10 AM.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top