The Other Shoe Dropping?: Sanders (should be) Suing DNC

If tax revenues exploded under Reagan, doesn't that mean so did the deficit and debt? How can you claim revenue exploded WITHOUT acknowledging the deficit and debt outpacing that increase?

 

I was just wandering if your perception of Reagan was from Life or Books. I lived through Carter and Reagan. I remember a much better Nation and World at the end of his term than when he took over; and I was a Democrat at the time.

 

Under Obama my taxes go up year over year

Under Reagan they stay the same, I just don't pay less next year.

Which one is a real tax increase?

 

Huh? I've talked about Cold War spending at the end of his presidency after the economy recovered many times. We are talking about the silly narrative you've created where Reagan raised taxes instead of the fact that he dramatically lowered them and the boom the economy, middle class earnings, and tax receipts after he cut taxes.

 

One of the most laughable current narratives by democrats is that Reagan was a liberal while still bashing his policies. How you think you can have it both ways is beyond me.

 

So you're going by one's personal tax burden vs overall tax? We're talking apples and oranges then. This is also why all partly why your graphs don't have anything to do with the conversation. That, and the change was in projected tax according to what was law at the time, and then after.


Please address the contradiction on what you call a tax increase with Obama vs what isn't one with Reagan. I'd like to hear it.

 

That's fantasy.

 

It's simple:

1) Reagan's policies aren't what they're said to be by the Right.

2) Reagan gets credit for things he had nothing to do with (90's growth)

3) If Reagan was a candidate today, he would be called a RINO.

These aren't having it "both ways."

 

What lead to the growth of the 90's in your opinion? If not for supply side economics of the 80's leading to huge advancements in technology

 

Explain which specific technologies were advanced due to "supply side economics" of the 1980's, and why any and all technological advancements before the 1980's were advanced without it. Taking something like a macroeconomic theory and giving it credit for personal computers, the internet, etc. seems like a pretty big jump with no trail to connect them. Especially given that George H.W. Bush lost an election due in large part to economic issues. I don't know what the expected lag time is on Reaganomics. Apparently more than 12 years? Or just whenever it's convenient?

 

private investments drove the train on advancements but the rest of the world started catching back up to us from ww2 and making the global economy way more competitive. stream lining regulations and increasing investment incentives helped drive the boom we rode into the 90's.

HW lost more to increasing taxes after promising not too. He also had a really dry personality and lost to one of the most personable national politicians of my life time.

 

I already showed the overall tax went dramatically down under Reagan so I'm not sure what your point was.

It's pretty simple. If I pay more in taxes it's a tax increase. If I don't it isn't. It's really not complicated

 

1) show me another president that dramatically reduced taxes and grew middle class incomes by 20 percent.

2) he certainly gets credit for the boom of the 80s

3) fantasy of the left. He's no more left at all than mitt Romney or McCain

 

I find it ironic that ip previously had Reagan as what was wrong with republicans and now wants to embrace him as one of his own

 

So no tech specifics? It's easy to credit macroeconomic concepts, it's hard to connect any meaningful dots isn't it?

 

Is this to be known as the Droski Index? All taxation rates will only be evaluated and categorized in how they affect a particular individual?

 

1) Another? Besides who?

2) But not the deficit or debt, weird.

3) He actually net raised taxes, and did so by raising taxes on things like gasoline. He gave amnesty to illegals. You're wrong.

 

What? He lowered taxes across the board. Even if you want to play your silly game about him slightly raising corporate taxes he still lowered the corporate taxes before that and they still net were the lowest in American history. Net EVERYONES taxes were significantly lower from the beginning of his presidency

 

Are you ****ing insane? How the **** did he net raise taxes? You think raising taxes on gas gets anywhere close to evening out lowering income taxes across the board?

 

???? What does this mean?