Bush was the worst president in modern history.

Your link demonstrates ignorance of the totality of supply side economic policies. Tax rates cuts are a Keynesian stimulus policy. And it is easily demonstrated that these policies do indeed produce increased economic growth and increased growth of the standard of living. This has been done repeatedly in many threads in this forum and many other forums. But typically this issue is like ground hog day. Regardless of the proof that supply side is a superior economic policy the left attacks it using Alinsky tactics over and over again.

 

Spending creates deficits. Bill Clinton was a supply sider.

 

The housing bubble and financial crisis were the result of government housing and financial regulations. The Gramm-Leach-Biley act only repealed sections 20 ad 32 of Glass-Steagal. Blaming GLB for the financial crisis is absurd. The Bush tax rate reductions brought in the most tax revenues of any four year period adjusted for inflation and population growth of any four year period in US history.

You've chosen supply side economic policies. Bill Clinton was a supply sider.

 

Actually they were tried for war crimes, and convicted, in absentia, in Kuala Lampur in April 2012, in accordance with international procedures. The efforts were led by Francis Boyle, a US law professor.

The mainstream media kept it mum, and that's why so few people know about it.

https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2012/05/12/bush-convicted-of-war-crimes-in-absentia/

 

True conviction comes with prison time.

 

Only for common folks. That does not necessarily apply to the privileged classes.

 

More evidence of my assertion that JFK would not be welcome in today's DNC. You guys can't even give him credit for his tax cuts working.

 

Yes Bush was the worst at the time, but today Trump is infinitely worse. With Republicans, there is no bottom. The bar is set so low for Donnie, he can say or do anything. He isn't remotely presidential.

 

What was the marginal rate for high income earners when Kennedy was prez?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/invest...y-tax-cut-never-really-happened/#5df137bd5451

 

I consider myself a JFK democrat and will only vote GOP. The Dems have been taken over by bolsheviks.

 

How many kangaroos were on the jury ??

 

All the numbers are here as are the results. JFK's tax cuts worked. The really interesting number is how tax revenue grew which is what so many on the left vehemently deny.

"President John F. Kennedy brought up the issue of tax reduction in his 1963 State of the Union address. His initial plan called for a $13.5 billion tax cut through a reduction of the top income tax rate from 91% to 65%, reduction of the bottom rate from 20% to 14%, and a reduction in the corporate tax rate from 52% to 47%. The first attempt at passing the tax cuts was rejected by Congress in 1963. Conservatives revolted at giving Kennedy a key legislative victory before the election of 1964.[3]

Kennedy was assassinated in November 1963, and was succeeded by Lyndon Johnson. Johnson was able to achieve Kennedy's goal of a tax cut in exchange for promising a budget not to exceed $100 billion in 1965. The Revenue Act of 1964 emerged from Congress and was signed by Johnson on February 26, 1964.[1][4]

The stated goals of the tax cuts were to raise personal incomes, increase consumption, and increase capital investments. Evidence shows that these goals were exceeded by large degree with the combination of tax cuts and domestic spending programs President Johnson advocated, such as Medicare.[4] Unemployment fell from 5.2% in 1964 to 4.5% in 1965, and fell to 3.8% in 1966.[4][5] Initial estimates predicted a loss of revenue as a result of the tax cuts, however, tax revenue increased in 1964 and 1965.[4][6]

 

I laugh when people make the absurd claim that "if not for Bush, the Middle East would be 'relatively calm' today".

President Clinton bombed Iraq repeatedly over his 8 years in office and there were terrorists attacks everywhere. Including ultimately the 9-11 attacks. Does that sound like calm.

And why on why is the U.S. blamed for Iraqis killing each other? Most of those who died were killed by other Iraqis. You don't see the U.S. and its allies blamed for the more than 2 million Germans murdered across Europe in the first couple of years after World War Two.

 

I doubt that many people on the left even know about that but now that they do they probably will blame us.

 

You baseless allegation has been utterly debunked and your nonsense above is ludicrous. JFK was far more than a one-dimensional POTUS as you are so disingenuously implying.

 

The economy was NOT stimulated by tax cuts. It was stimulated by INCREASING the minimum wage, EXPANDING unemployment benefits, BOOSTING social security benefits and SPENDING more on highway construction.

https://www.npr.org/2013/11/12/244772593/jfks-lasting-economic-legacy-lower-tax-rates

It is worth noting that JFK was PRO government SPENDING in his own words!

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/01/26/the-myth-of-jfk-as-supply-side-tax-cutter

And JFK's actual lasting legacy is Civil Rights!

And studies PROVE that lowering tax rates for the wealthy does NOT stimulate economic growth.

https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/gop-tax-rate-cut-wealthy/

 

Denial of anything that conflicts with deeply held "necessary illusions" is strong with some.

 

Very good post. Revisionist history is all the rage, particularly when it comes to the GOP. Bush is not yet far back enough in history for enough to forget but this is clearly the case with Reagan. Reagan was a fiscal disaster. Despite increasing revenue he increase deficits like no one before or after (sans the one off 2009 event which was due to the Bush Crash of 2008 - revenues dropped from 2.7 Trillion to 2.1 Trillion).

 

JFK was much too hawkish for today’s illiberal progressive party of goodness. He also would place the welfare of US citizens above that of those in the US illegally.

 

the stimulus for the people that Obama agreed to and Bush was against helped the economy recover
Obama did something at the beginning of his first year that effected the economy, thus giving him credit for it

Trump did something at the end of his first year, so we will see how it goes from here, I predict the tax cuts will give a boost at first as well, then we will see what happens the next year as corps always base the forward years on the previous years, which means the tax cuts for the corps will not be seen as extra next year like they are this year for them

 

Which are you claiming is the "necessary illusion" then, that 9/11 did or did not happen on Bush's watch?

 

So JFK didn't propose the tax cut that led to 5% GDP? Didn't say " A rising tide lifts all boats"? You are in denial.

 

Just keep turning a blind eye to the fact that JFK cut taxes and it worked.

"The United States Revenue Act of 1964 (Pub.L. 88–272), also known as the Tax Reduction Act, was a bipartisan tax cut bill signed by President Lyndon Johnson on February 26, 1964. Individual income tax rates were cut across the board by approximately 20%. In addition to individual income tax cuts, the act slightly reduced corporate tax rates and introduced a minimum standard deduction."

You may enjoy watching this too. Or it may enrage you. LOL








Contents

 

Kennedy is by far the most overrated American president in history.

 

You left off Katrina, W. Bush's worse offense.
But not all of this is accurate. The mortgage crisis was largely the fault of Democrats having put in place requirements to give loans to people who couldn't afford it.
Both wars were winnable - and won. He has no end game plan whatsoever and what was done was incompetent and absurd.
The bail out was done very badly, but was necessary and should have been done correctly (meaning strictly defining how the money was used, rather than using it up to buy up smaller banks and lending companies - plus personal bonuses.