Nice rebuttal!  You should write more often.  You did write that
right?

On Oct 14, 5:24 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote:
>     Tax cuts for the rich trickle down to everyone else. Baloney.
> Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush both sliced taxes on the rich and
> what happened? Most Americans' wages (measured by the real median
> wage) began flattening under Reagan and has dropped since George W.
> Bush. Trickle-down economics is a cruel joke.How is it again that taking 
> water from the deep end of the pool -- sloshing some of it on the pool deck 
> -- and pouring it into the shallow end raises the level of the pool? When 
> Government confiscates dollars to funnel into THEIR politically motivated 
> schemes and providing livelihood to those who produce nothing, those 
> Individuals can no longer spend/save/invest them ... taking those dollars 
> away from THOSE recipients.    Higher taxes on the rich would hurt the 
> economy and slow job
> growth. False. From the end of World War II until 1981, the richest
> Americans faced a top marginal tax rate of 70 percent or above. Under
> Dwight Eisenhower it was 91 percent. Even after all deductions and
> credits, the top taxes on the very rich were far higher than they've
> been since. Yet the economy grew faster during those years than it has
> since. (Don't believe small businesses would be hurt by a higher
> marginal tax; fewer than 2 percent of small business owners are in the
> highest tax bracket.)Same things as above, only NOW Reich introduces 
> causality problems. Post WWI part 2 the US had capital advantages over other 
> countries like Japan -- as those economies 'came back' that advantage 
> waned.    Shrinking government generates more jobs. Wrong again. It means
> fewer government workers - everyone from teachers, fire fighters,
> police officers, and social workers at the state and local levels to
> safety inspectors and military personnel at the federal. And fewer
> government contractors, who would employ fewer private-sector workers.
> According to Moody's economist Mark Zandi (a campaign advisor to John
> McCain), the $61 billion in spending cuts proposed by the House GOP
> will cost the economy 700,000 jobs this year and next.And yet we MORE of the 
> same thing as above. Here Reich imagines that he is creating jobs by having 
> 10 people pay an 11th but ignoring the loss created for each of the 10. Why 
> not make EVERYONE a Government worker and SOLVE the unemployment woes AND the 
> economy itself?    Cutting the budget deficit now is more important than 
> boosting the
> economy. Untrue. With so many Americans out of work, budget cuts now
> will shrink the economy. They'll increase unemployment and reduce tax
> revenues. That will worsen the ratio of the debt to the total economy.
> The first priority must be getting jobs and growth back by boosting
> the economy. Only then, when jobs and growth are returning vigorously,
> should we turn to cutting the deficit.And yet MORE of the same thing as 
> above. Now Reich wants those 10 people above plus a few more to pay people 
> NOT to work.    Medicare and Medicaid are the major drivers of budget 
> deficits.
> Wrong. Medicare and Medicaid spending is rising quickly, to be sure.
> But that's because the nation's health-care costs are rising so fast.
> One of the best ways of slowing these costs is to use Medicare and
> Medicaid's bargaining power over drug companies and hospitals to
> reduce costs, and to move from a fee-for-service system to a fee-for-
> healthy outcomes system. And since Medicare has far lower
> administrative costs than private health insurers, we should make
> Medicare available to everyone.Health care costs are rising precisely BECAUSE 
> of Medicaid/Medicare (and numerous other interventions into the marketplace). 
> What incentive do bureaucrats -- spending other people's money -- have to 
> economize? None.    Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. Don't believe it. 
> Social
> Security is solvent for the next 26 years. It could be solvent for the
> next century if we raised the ceiling on income subject to the Social
> Security payroll tax. That ceiling is now $106,800.Correct. In a Ponzi scheme 
> the dupes have a choice. With social security the dupes are forced. Raising 
> the ceiling proves the point made by those who correctly identify this scam 
> as largely identical to Ponzi. What is raising the ceiling but the equivalent 
> to finding new dupes to support the others?    It's unfair that lower-income 
> Americans don't pay income tax.
> Wrong. There's nothing unfair about it. Lower-income Americans pay out
> a larger share of their paychecks in payroll taxes, sales taxes, user
> fees, and tolls than everyone else.What is actually fair is for ALL 
> Individuals to pay the same dollar amount. Why should one Individual be 
> forced to pay more or less for the monopoly 'service' Government? How -- 
> exactly -- is this section a purported 'myth'?Demagogues through history have 
> known that big lies, repeated often
> enough, start being believed - unless they're rebutted. These seven
> economic whoppers are just plain wrong. Make sure you know the truth -
> and spread it on.As William Anderson observed, "Robert Reich, the former U.S. 
> Labor Secretary and full-time crank".
> Don't take his advice and continue chanting his big lies. I guess we can at 
> least take refuge in the fact that he announced he was going to lie.
> Regard$,
> --MJThe art of politics, under democracy, is simply the art of ringing it. 
> Two branches reveal themselves. There is the art of the demagogue, and there 
> is the art of what may be called, by a shot-gun marriage of Latin and Greek, 
> the demaslave. They are complementary, and both of them are degrading to 
> their practitioners. The demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to 
> be untrue to men he knows to be idiots. The demaslave is one who listens to 
> what these idiots have to say and then pretends that he believes it himself. 
> -- H.L. Mencken

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to