The Astonishing Stupidity of Not Raising Taxes on the Rich When Budgets Are Tight

[Steerpike]

http://www.alternet.org/story/150099/

Conservatives don't give a shit about history because they go by "gut feelings", not science(economic or otherwise) in their decisions.

The Astonishing Stupidity of Not Raising Taxes on the Rich When Budgets Are Tight
History shows that when spending is cut -- in the name of balancing the budget -- recessions immediately follow.
March 1, 2011

The current economy is routinely and universally referred to as the worst recession since the Great Depression.

It makes sense, therefore, to look back at government tax and spending policies during the Depression and what the results were.

1932 -- Hoover raises the top tax rate from to 25 to 63 percent.

1933 -- Roosevelt comes into office. He begins spending at the same time that new tax hike comes into effect. The Depression bottoms out.

1934 -- Recovery begins. The GNP rises 7.7 percent, unemployment falls to 21.7 percent.

1935 -- New government spending on public works and rural electrification. A push to strengthen labor and raise wages. New taxes through the creation of Social Security.

The GNP grows another 8.1 percent, and unemployment continues to fall.

1936 -- The top tax rate is raised again. This time to 79 percent.

GNP grows a record 14.1 percent; unemployment falls even further.

1937 -- Roosevelt is afraid of deficits! He cuts spending for 1937.

There's a new recession. It continues for a year.

1939 -- The U.S. borrows, resumes deficit spending, this time on a military build-up. The recession ends.

1941 -- America enters World War II.

In economic terms, it's the New Deal on steroids. The top tax rate goes up to 91 percent. Nonetheless, government spending is so high that by 1945 the deficit is 123 percent of GDP. Unemployment is ended by employing 16 million people directly in the armed forces and millions more are employed producing war material and supporting the military.

The Great Depression is finally over.

When taxes were raised the economy improved. Every time. Deficits had no negative effect on the economy. Indeed, when deficits were at their highest, the economy boomed.

After spending was cut -- to balance the budget -- a recession immediately followed. When taxes were raised and government spending resumed -- with deficits -- that recession ended.

When taxes were raised again, and government spending went sky high, the Great Depression finally ended.

So here we are. We refused to raise taxes. The recession continues. Now, we're going to cut spending.

[Steerpike]

dawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwgg s

[dual]

the stupidest part for me is the dramatic shift in the conversation coming from the right wing now compard to when bush was in office

when W was president we had to cut taxes (mostly for the rich) and spend boatloads of money to stimulate the economy and also also keep wall street from going bust and runing the economy. it didnt matter what kind of debt we accrued (and there was plenty of it)

now of course if theres a deficit anywhere its the end of the fucking world, we have to strip teachers of the right to bargain collectively to pay for this. seems pretty logical

faggots argue now that we cant raise taxes on the rich/repeal the bush tax cuts because it would scare all the rich people into not wanting to do business her. they might move their companies offshore. like they arent doing that any fucking how
people are stupid

[SkyNigger]

1941 -- America enters World War II.

In economic terms, it's the New Deal on steroids. The top tax rate goes up to 91 percent. Nonetheless, government spending is so high that by 1945 the deficit is 123 percent of GDP. Unemployment is ended by employing 16 million people directly in the armed forces and millions more are employed producing war material and supporting the military.

The Great Depression is finally over.

In economic terms, it's Keynesian expansionary monetary policy on steroids.

It's a technically correct article, but why do I get the feeling the author has never heard of Keynes.

Oh, because he doesn't mention the greatest economist in history once. Or credit the fact that the New Deal was inspired by Keynesian theory, and slightly butchered by Roosevelt, yet still grossly successful (such is the extent of Keynes' inherent god).

WWII wasn't inspired by Keynes, but it was perfect Keynesian theory in practice.

And I've been saying for almost two years now, I think the US is heading for war.

[dual]

anyoen else remember trickle down economics

[SkyNigger]

http://i.imgur.com/komjs.jpg

[Steerpike]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_L3I4jwpsDnc/S-OQwLML64I/AAAAAAAAHJk/QhDKsLYUa5c/s1600/reaganomics.jpg

[SkyNigger]

anyoen else remember trickle down economics

The non-existence of anything resembling intelligence in the middle classes and lower classes has always been stupefying.

Economics is probably the simplest vocation in the world. Economic theory can be understood by children. And yet, in 2011, maybe 1% of voters have even a vague grasp of macroeconomics.

Spending = good.
Spending on consumables = better.
Hoarding = bad.
Hoarding and ferreting overseas = worse.

Yes, let's slash marginal tax rates and cull government spending. I wonder if this will put brakes on the economy or inject it with nitrous. Complicated stuff.

But then, we do live in a world where Sarah Palin is the runaway favourite for the nomination so...

[MistaCobalina]

In economic terms, it's Keynesian expansionary monetary policy on steroids.

It's a technically correct article, but why do I get the feeling the author has never heard of Keynes.

Oh, because he doesn't mention the greatest economist in history once. Or credit the fact that the New Deal was inspired by Keynesian theory, and slightly butchered by Roosevelt, yet still grossly successful (such is the extent of Keynes' inherent god).

WWII wasn't inspired by Keynes, but it was perfect Keynesian theory in practice.

And I've been saying for almost two years now, I think the US is heading for war.


He didn't mention Keynes because Keynes is basically a dirty word these days, at least in the US, and referencing him by name will instantly ( and unjustly) discredit your argument.

The problem with Economics in the US is that most of the people that understand it are people who directly benefit from supply side economics. The people who would benefit the most from Keynsian economics are too busy selling crack or watching nascar to be fucked with learning about it.

[SkyNigger]

The Dems buying "trickle down spending" and "affirmative action" as logical theories, is probably proof that they are the GOP in liberal drag.

[dual]

i dont think palin is the favorite right now but i agree with the rest

id put huckabee and christie ahead of her atm, probably that mormon fuck too
gingrich probably a tossup with palin
i just dont see her getting it because a) shes retarded and b) she really has no experience as a politician... 2 yrs as a gov? and a few months campaigning for vp ? pretty hilarious she even has a chance

before you go there, yes i know about obama

[anatine]

http://i.imgur.com/Ej5de.jpg

[MistaCobalina]

The Dems buying "trickle down spending" and "affirmative action" as logical theories, is probably proof that they are the GOP in liberal drag.

This is exactly true. The difference between the parties when it comes to economic is laughably superficial. It's been coke verses pepsi for basically the entire time I've been voting, and probably long before that. Political enthusiasts in the US root for their party and politicians more like a sports team, rooting for them to score political points over the other side, rather than actually being educated and caring about issues and policy.

[SkyNigger]

i dont think palin is the favorite right now but i agree with the rest

id put huckabee and christie ahead of her atm, probably that mormon fuck too
gingrich probably a tossup with palin
i just dont see her getting it because a) shes retarded and b) she really has no experience as a politician... 2 yrs as a gov? and a few months campaigning for vp ? pretty hilarious she even has a chance

before you go there, yes i know about obama

You're using logical sentiment to predict the sentiments of a mass of people who cannot spell 'logic'. Retarded people don't think morons are retarded. They identify with them.

Palin's celebrity status will prove unassailable by the lower 'lights' of the GOP. FAUX News have been priming her for the race for some time now.

Why Sarah Palin Will Win the 2012 Republican Presidential Nomination - Betfair blog (http://betting.betfair.com/specials/politics-betting/us-politics/the-betfair-contrarian-why-sarah-palin-will-win-the-2012-rep-020311.html)

Then again, the Betfair line says you're right. And I did lose a fortune smashing the McCain line in 08. So wtf do I know...

Betfair line is:

Romney ~4
Daniels ~10
Pawlenty ~9
Huckabee ~11
Palin ~13

[MistaCobalina]

I think huckabee is worse than palin.

[SkyNigger]

I think huckabee is worse than palin.

I agree. Because Palin will be controlled in ways Huckabee's faith won't permit.

This is a ridiculous (and scary) line:

http://i.imgur.com/kHqIr.png

Only tiny amount matched, but anyone who knows anything about sampling realises accurate predictions can be made with laughably small sample sizes. Of course, Betfair doesn't sample the US, so that fucks with the sample on one hand...except, foreigners historically skew US politics betting way out to the left.

So that line might very well be 1.80 v 2.25 or even Evens...

it is indeed bush snr on 2nd right

Take that, Alzheimer's.

[MistaCobalina]

SkyNigger:
lol same. is that Bush snr 2nd from right?


Well, he was Reagan's veep. Reagan is bending over with laughter, if you missed him.

[Hillbilly Jim]

omg you are gonna fuck up ians googles

[MistaCobalina]

i think that's james baker on the far right. not positive tho.

[GAMBLE-BOT]

ths thread is awesome. how did i miss it

[GAMBLE-BOT]

oh cause i couldnt log on for any lenght of time

[GAMBLE-BOT]

I agree. Because Palin will be controlled in ways Huckabee's faith won't permit.

This is a ridiculous (and scary) line:

http://i.imgur.com/kHqIr.png

Only tiny amount matched, but anyone who knows anything about sampling realises accurate predictions can be made with laughably small sample sizes. Of course, Betfair doesn't sample the US, so that fucks with the sample on one hand...except, foreigners historically skew US politics betting way out to the left.

So that line might very well be 1.80 v 2.25 or even Evens...



Take that, Alzheimer's.

in that euro-line i dont even know who is a favorite. I guess its saying Dems are 1.8 -1?

[Hillbilly Jim]

palin bachman 2012
that will stick it to those muslims

[Steerpike]

ths thread is awesome. how did i miss it

you missed it because you posted it on the wrong site first




http://www.flicksandbits.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/robert-de-niro-little-fockers-poster.jpg

[SkyNigger]

palin bachman 2012
that will stick it to those muslims

Fuck I'd hecka love to see me some Crusades.

I don't really have a side, per se. I just want to see Christians and A-rabs and the Haredim kill each other.

[Harley]

sigh, any insurgent war on the american homeland will completely disrupt my television viewing.

[SkyNigger]

JPf9zZu1Yto

Pretty sure Dirt Nasty breaks it all down perfectly. Dirt for Prez!

[Hillbilly Jim]

he was on the first episdoe of sheens corner

[dual]

in that euro-line i dont even know who is a favorite. I guess its saying Dems are 1.8 -1?

yeah i dont know how to read those odds either

[DankBlaniels]

odds of 1.6 will pay 1.6 dollars for every one dollar bet

so betfair has the dems as favourite

[SkyNigger]

I think huckabee is worse than palin.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/03/proud-to-be-cynical/72061/

Proud to Be Cynical
MAR 4 2011

Mike Huckabee, in 2011, on Natalie Portman having a child with a man she's engaged to, before they've actually married:

"One of the most troubling things is that people see a Natalie Portman or some other Hollywood starlet that boasts of, hey look, we're having children, we're not married, but we're having children and they're doing just fine."

"There aren't really a lot of single moms out there that are making millions of dollars each year by being in a movie."

"I think it gives a distorted image that not everybody hires nannies and caretakers and nurses. Most single moms are very poor, uneducated, can't get a job, and if it weren't for government assistance, their kids would be starving to death and would not get healthcare."

Mike Huckabee, in 2008, on Bristol Palin having a child with a man she was engaged to, before they'd actually married:

"It ought to be a reminder that here is a family that loves one another. They stuck with each other though the tough times and that's what families do." ... Huckabee said the surprise pregnancy announcement should not affect vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin's support in the conservative and religious right communities. ... "I'm grateful for the way she's being supported by her family."

There is a lot wrong here which I'm sure you guys can tease out. That last "most single moms" sentence is heinous.

But again facts don't really matter here. This is a strict ideology built on an alternate reality. You can't reason with people who not only believe their president is Kenyan, but need to believe he's Kenyan. The belief comes first. The casus belli of white populism is resentment of those not like us. Facts are mere materiel meant to be invented, discarded, smelted and recast in service of the cause.

[Hillbilly Jim]

most single moms are terrible cunts

[Steerpike]

http://4chanarchive.org/images/312579273/1298864283518.png

[Steerpike]

http://4chanarchive.org/images/312579273/1298864895346.jpg

[chuckwhoolery]

I am not even close to kidding here:

If sarah palin gets elected to the highest office in the US, I am emmigrating

[VaughnP]

I would say there is a much less than 1% chance that she even wins the primary. I literally interact with about 30 upper middle class and upper class white women 4 or 5 days a weeks. These are the people who actually vote, and they all literally despise her. It is to the point that they bad mouth her as a way to show that they are not stupid. This all goes without mentioning that she will have none of the Hispanic vote.

If she is running this bad in Texas, there is no chance.


The international media of course likes to make us look stupid, and though I can't be sure, Palin is probably the poster child.

Also:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/01/gallup-poll-palins-unfavorability-hits-record-high.php

[dual]

pallin way more likely as a vp nom, and way more of those whos nailin palin pornos in 2012

<----hed watches em so much he atrophied the muscles in his left arm. australia, as it turns out, has a huge problem with arm abuse.

[Hillbilly Jim]

BUT IF THE TAX RATE IS TOOOO HIGH BUSINESSES WILL TAKE THEIR BUSISNES TOOTHER COUNTRIES!!!

[chuckwhoolery]

Not to derail this thread, but now I remember my favorite part of boris...

Harley was banned
Dude you are such a monster fag, been here like 2 days, have 4 reps and 2 are you just being a homo, you are seriously the reason I will never visit austrailia unless I have to for business, just die, please

...I am not even close to joking

[Steerpike]

Chuck does raise some valuable points here.

[Hillbilly Jim]

Chuck does raise some valuable points here.

he really does