It was fine then, but is unacceptable now...

It was fine then..

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgbJ-Fs1ikA&feature=player_embedded"]Reagan--No Loopholes For Millionaires - YouTube[/ame]

but not now...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASQNITVweLo&feature=player_embedded"]WH Attacks GOP Candidates Vow to Nix Any Tax Hike Deal - YouTube[/ame]


Is this another example of Republicans doing an about face on policy matters? (Individual mandate, anyone?) Any attempt to directly compare these two clips on a one for one basis is likely a flawed one, but it does speak to a general attitude. It shouldn't be dismissed as irrelevant. Fact is, President Ron Reagan did raise taxes and is still widely lauded as one of our finest Presidents. Even the man's detractors don't usually focus on his "over taxing" as a main complaint. (Under taxing, yes...)

Twenty years later, things are very different in our Country. Unemployment is higher, our manufacturing sector is shell of its former self and many, many of the jobs lost over the last few decades aren't ever coming back. To suggest that because...

Continue reading....

 

It's politics. Reagan needed Democrat support for his plans. Democrats could sign on as long as Reagan could assure them that millinaires wouldn't be getting too many breaks.

 

I get pulled over for driving 100 and get a week's salary as a penalty.

A rich person gets pulled over for doing 100 and pays it with the loose cash in his wallet.

See some disproportion here?

 

I agree with the OP. I am wondering where all the Reagan worshippers/modern Republicans are and why they haven't posted a rebuttal on this thread. Surely they aren't going to let a little thing like the facts interfere with their opinion?

 

The contradictory postion of candidates and elected officials within a party over time is to be expected. Republicans (the same goes for Democrats) are not interchangeable robots programmed to think and act identically and what is considered politically feasible and what will get someone nominated or elected is sometimes different. The factors weighing in the decision of what stance to run on range from what will work to what will sell to what the candidates views actually are.

If a debate over the merits of a postion is desired, why does any of the above matter anyway? People on this board (you included I hope) should be drawing their own conclusions on what is proper derived from their own rational judgement rather than substituting some politicians judgement for their own.

 

Just maybe Reagan felt it was the right thing to do and the stupid Republican Party today has got lost in what is right as far as taxing the rich goes. I don't agree with their stance on the rich at all and I am a Republican. I think most Republicans agree, but don't have the guts to voice an opinion that differs from the Party line. Much like Democrats do. They lead us around like sheep.

 

Yes I said it. Many only vote (R) for the same reasons many vote (D). They do not believe in the party but they cant bring themselves to vote the other way for what they feel are ethical reasons and they defend to this end.

I gave up on both. I am a registered moron because I, at one time, actually believed in a party. Both parties cater to a select group giving them scraps while they collectively destroy America. They can all burn in my opinion.

I could be an (R) if I could live with the duplicity and I could be a (D) if I could live with the duplicity.

 

So you want more fines for people with higher incomes?

what next, higher gas prices for those with higher incomes?

each person receives a federal color coded income ID card?

If you don't want a fine for speeding, don't speed.

 

Congrats on such a completely stupid example of "unfairness".

Try not driving 100mph and see how this "disproportion" affects you.

 

no I dont' at all.

what difference does it make how much money you have? if you break the law, you pay the same penalty as anyone else.

If you have less money than someone else, maybe you should look at how you are budgeting or get a better/another job.

OR just obey the law and you won't have to worry about the fines.

 

Using that as an example. I guess we should charge the rich more for everything they buy, up and over the sales tax the rest of us pay.

 

I think it's fair that they pay a higher sales tax on their Gulfstreams than I pay on mine.

 

The wealthy benefit millions and millions,,,and you? do you see a disproportion there as well?
You do not punish a person because they did better than you monetarily. They already pay 80% of the tax's, we need a plan in this country and taking theirs is not it. Each situation is not the same and everybody knows that, it would be nice if it were, but it's not. Hitting them harder does what exactly?, take off an ounce or less of the debt and possibly hurt the job market?

That's jealousy and not a solution, it's scapegoating in my opinion. You are falling for nothing but rhetoric...HIT THEM,,,,,,and you will still be short 17 Trillion....We need a person with viable solutions, and not campaigning....

 

You're asking for some additional value to society for execution of a crime based upon who someone is.

Isn't that exactly what you rail against when you say that it shouldn't matter what color skin someone has?

It seems your standards have doubled back on themselves.

 

Yes of course,,,even pay toilets.....but.....if we did that they would not be rich anymore and WE would pay the tax's and not them....OR...Perhaps they would just leave and stay rich,,,,,PERFECT!!
What we need to do is obvious, and that is to entice all the wealthy to stay and prosper right now, get them more motivated than ever. Let the great minded and driven people in this country do what they do best...MAKE MONEY!!!

When you are down you fall back on your proven strength, you do not stifle it. Is our strength the poor???, nope!, is it politicians??? DOUBLE NOPE!!!







IT'S BUSINESS,,I SAY, LET HER RIP!!!

 

Plenty people believe that. Envy is the grand sin of the unwashed.

 

The fact is .............that's then, this is now!!!, we are Trillions in the hole and taxing the wealthy will do NOTHING!!,,only add some skinny jobs bill for an election, how did his first plan go? Those are the facts....

The track record is lousy, and we need a long term plan.

AND A NEW PRESIDENT......

 

And congress. Every one of them needs to go.

 

If taxing the wealthy will do nothing, why is the Right so dead set on raising taxes on the poorest Americans?

 

There simply is not enough wealthy...............correct? We need to change the way the entire country does business including how we tax. We need a LONG TERM PLAN....
You know as well as I if Obama implements his plan it wont make a dent, he even admits that. This is campaigning, we need new ideas...

 

We need an effort by the majority. We need Americans to get past the political scraps they are handed and stop being played.

Religion is played by the (R) who do not care about you and rights are played by the (D) who do not care about you. All distractions from what really needs to be done.

The (R) gets the votes of the White puppets and the (D) get the votes of the Black puppets. They both get votes from the moderate puppets for one issue or the other and none of them really have to do with our daily lives and long term survival.

Crap I am a puppet; I was until I refused to vote last time.

 

I.E., we need a plan that taxes the rich less and the poor more. This is all I've seen coming from the right so far.. Is that the 'Long Term Plan' we need?

How many decades of failed Trickle down politcs will it take for people to realize the middle class is dieing?

 

We have always had the very wealthy with us. But there was also a time that didn't bother most of us. We didn't care they were rich, because we had good jobs and we made decent money. Now that government helped get rid of those good jobs, we want the government to give us the money the rich has. Then we can also drive the rich out with the jobs we also lost. Then, we can all sit back and do nothing but draw welfare off the government. Oh wait, there is no money left for welfare. (*)(*)(*)(*), we should have thought ahead. We shouldn't have put all our trust in government to do the right thing.

 

Yeah, I'm a independent but still a puppet due to our choices I guess. There are things you can look at logically however, and right now we are facing a person that wants to spend Billions more for election purposes, and that I am against! He wants to whip up a instant band-aid for his dismal record and attract a vote on taxing people that have nothing to do with HIS problem,,,it's wrong.
If people like the man they will still vote for him, lets not put ourselves more in the hole.....

The only hope we have is business, it's our only shot. That's not Rocket science here to anybody. I think you see it for what it is, right now it's all we got.

 

Huh! Interesting response; fits with another post I just did:

http://www.politicalforum.com/current-events/212224-everyone-should-pay-their-fair-share-15.html#post4624319

I submit that taxing those who you would call "the poor" less is part of the problem with the inequity we've created in society. I build that case based upon what took place wrt to income levels of the lowest quintile during Reagan (it went up), and in observing that when we decreased taxes on the upper quintiles, their percentage of total taxes paid went up.

I used house.gov data to support my conclusions. If you'd like to take on my assertions, please hop in there.