And how is that Dogg? As I said, every time the taxes have been cut, revenue TO the government goes up. When R. Reagan cut taxes, after 8 years, the revenue doubled. When Kennedy cut taxes, revenue went up. And once again:


http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg1765.cfm

 

Some interesting thoughts---

In the book Culture Shift, author R. Albert Mohler Jr. diagnoses a number of the things that are breaking down in our culture. Of particular concern is the poor parenting going on in our homes and families. Today's parents have turned into hyper-protectors, Mohler says. Here are some of the key points he makes along these lines:
Today's parents are now spending a great deal of their time doing little more than protecting their children from life. Our kids are growing up to be pampered wimps who are incapable of assuming adult responsibility and have no idea how to handle the routine challenges of life.

Kids have to excel at everything, even if parents have to actually do the work or negotiate an assisted success. Although error and experimentation are the true mothers of success, parents are taking pains to remove failure from the equation.

Smothered by parental attention and decision making during childhood and adolescence, these young people arrive on college campuses without the ability to make their own decision, live with their choices, learn from their experiences, and grapple with the issues of adult life.

Even in prekindergarten programs, parents now show up with a list of special demands, insisting that their child must be treated with special care. Inevitably, this is often transformed into diagnoses of learning disabilities that will require special instructional accommodations.

Cell phones are partly to blame. Even in college...students are typically in contact with their parents several times a day, reporting every flicker of experience.... When parents play along with this dependency, they 'infantilize' their children, 'keeping them in a permanent state of dependency.' Life is lived in an endless present tense, with no need to frame long-term decisions, make plans, or engage in sustained interpersonal conversations.

Many see life as a competitive game, and they are determined to do whatever it takes to get their children on top. One college student said, "I wish my parents had some hobby other than me."

I have seen this in the classroom. If a student works really hard---they expect to get an "A." If they don't a parent will make a phone call or make a personal appearance...I use the analogy---"If I work real hard, and really really work, then I should be able to break a four-minute mile? Correct---nope...as hard as I work, I am not going to run a four-minute mile." Sometimes it doesn't work out that way, but the parents are worried about their child's self-esteem issues. I had to tell a parent one time that some of the best lessons that we learn are through failure, but they do not want to let their little darlings fail.

Everybody has to receive a trophy...a fellow educator said it best: "When we honor everyone, we honor no one."

Tim C.

 

Good post Tim.

 

Just something I found while searching for the backbone of this discusion. I'm no competition for the knowledge some of you retain on these subjects, but i do search for the answers to the qustions. I found this article to be of enough interest to post it.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...UGBI72U8Q1.DTL

I haven't checked the Kenedy cuts yet, maybe I'll check into it later.

 

Check other sources tumba. The sf chronicle is hardly a good source. Go figure.. sf paper claims reagan didn't treat aids right It totally skirted my point anyways. I said outragous spending is doing us in. All they said is tax cuts and spending did us in. Facts are facts. The revenue to the government went up when Reagan cut taxes. Your article did not disprove me.

 

I did think about the scource as I was posting it. But there are more opinions , than there are problems. Then there are also the usless opinions, that create problems

 

On the flip side, here is a good "Rush" for you

http://www.ronaldreagan.com/rush3.html

 

Great post Tumba!

 

No PBS? ........... Future Sesame Street killer

 

Firstly since you point out others links, your link to the Heritage Foundation is a link to the republican party line basically.

Second, I read and know your link and theories...By another name they are called Supply Side Economics, or Trickle Down Economics or even VooDoo Economics. I call them Failed Economics.

They are all the same and have failed to accurately represent how the economy is REALLY doing. This is why the current economic mess was missed completely. Laffer Curve/Supply side theories use GDP as the primary measure of the economy/argument.

"The major disadvantage of using GDP as an indicator of standard of living is that it is not, strictly speaking, a measure of standard of living. GDP is intended to be a measure of particular types of economic activity within a country. Nothing about the definition of GDP suggests that it is necessarily a measure of standard of living. For instance, in an extreme example, a country which exported 100 per cent of its production and imported nothing would still have a high GDP, but a very poor standard of living."
*GDP does not take disparity in incomes between the rich and poor into account.
*GDP counts work that produces no net change or that results from repairing harm. For example, rebuilding after a natural disaster or war may produce a considerable amount of economic activity and thus boost GDP. The economic value of health care is another classic example — it may raise GDP if many people are sick and are receiving expensive treatment.

And the negatives of using GDP as a measure of a countries economy or economic wealth go on and on....

Simon Kuznets the inventor of the GDP, in his very first report to the US Congress in 1934 said..."the welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measure of national income."

In 1962, Kuznets stated, "Distinctions must be kept in mind between quantity and quality of growth, between costs and returns, and between the short and long run. Goals for more growth should specify more growth of what and for what."

Stop believing in VooDoo theories that don't and didn't work.

 

So should we be looking to "trickle up" theories?

Will putting more money in the hands of the people at the bottom help them climb to the top, or will it allow them to have more stuff at the bottom?

The New Deal was essentially trickle up economics. It didn't work then. Is it going to work now?

It seems to me that there is a big difference between giving someone a lower tax rate and spending billions so people who haven't got as much ambition can have stuff too.

 

Great post Wittom. My thoughts exactly. If your going to use the money of the wealthy, don't take it from them. entice them to spend it. That way they buy lots of nice stuff that the poor people make. That way the poor people have a job and can move up in wealth. And those that don't want to move up and better them selfs... well mexico is just a few miles south... CYA! Just stop sucking of the American teat. BTW.. the "poor" in America are the most wealthy people compared to a very large percentage of the rest of the world. If you care so much about the poor, just send your check to the un.. I am sure they will distribute the money wisely.

 

Neither "supply side" or "trickle up" theories have worked very well as practiced. The rich don't trickle down (greed) and most poor don't trickle their way up (lazy).

Why do we have to give anything to anyone? Excess money should go to the public good...roads, more roads, bridges, arts, science, parks, police, fire, better power grid, cleaner water....better public mass transit (less cars),
Currently we cut taxes and cut public services at the same time.

I agree but why entice the wealthy with money. They already have plenty. Whats wrong with really trying to make the world better?
Currently we keep patching it, doing the same drills to just get by and complain about how broken it is.
Everyone should pay. Nobody should get a pass.

Flat tax for everyone....for the public good.
We waste many billions.

 

Hundreds of billions...

 

This is a very disturbing comment. You say tax cuts are enticing the wealthy with money? They are the ones who earned it. The government is taking it. It was already there money. Tax cuts let them keep more of what they earned. And don't start the greed thing. That is NOT true. They buy things like boats and cars and airplanes. They hire more people. They spend more money. That creates jobs and generates more taxes. That is a fact. Trickle down works. It is government spending that is out of control.