New CBO numbers: Obamacare will cost the US 2.5 million jobs

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

You still haven't acknowledged that Reagan lowered federal income tax and then raised SS tax....... You are smart enough to understand right?

Please provide the link to the Executive Order signed by Reagan.

Or just the number, please! I can look it up.

You are smart enough to understand what an "Executive Order" is, right?

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Regan didn't raise any SS taxes. Dumbshit. (And I try to avoid calling names in here!)

Sure he did. I can't help it if you are to ignorant to acknowledge it. No executive order, he signed it into law LLiar. Damn you trying to be cute this early?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

Sure he did. I can't help it if you are to ignorant to acknowledge it. No executive order, he signed it into law LLiar. Damn you trying to be cute this early?

What a fool. You probably don't really want to "go there" ... but you just did.

That's your answer for just about any question ..... "if you are "to" (sic) ignorant" ..!!!!!

For your "edification" ... hopefully you are a good "bean counter" .... if not brush up ...

"a. On March 24, 1983, the House passed the conference report by a
vote of 243 (80-R, 163-D) to 102 (48-R, 54-D). /

"b. In the early morning hours of March 25, 1983, the Senate passed
H.R. 1900, as agreed to in the conference report, by a vote of 58
(32-R, 26-D) to 14 (8-R, 6-D). The Congress then adjourned
for the Easter recess."

I am no fan of Reagan's in some areas. He promoted and Congress passed an elimination of some tax deferred investments, which were "growth" oriented in my opinion and during the mid-80's I saw direct consequences and those investments were in "low to medium" multi-family housing projects that provided housing for people on a sliding scale (not "section 8" subsistence) and the loop hole for dumping the projects increased the bubble bursting of the S&L disasters with over-inflated collateral for real estate loans. But criticism is due where it belongs. Congress (look at the numbers) sent a package in an effort to salvage SS. Like many packages ... take the bitter with the sweet.

SS taxes are increasing as we speak. I know. I pay the increase. By your standards, Obama did that.

By mine. Congress. Because Congress legislates. Something your hero, the constitutional law prof, doesn't know!

Reagan was (and still is) a better bean counter than you are!

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

SS taxes are increasing as we speak. I know. I pay the increase. By your standards, Obama did that.

!

He fucking sure signed it into law , just like Reagan did!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/01/l...ecurity-taxes/
just want to briefly focus on taxes, Social Security taxes. As part of the “American Tax Relief Act of 2012″ recently passed by the lame-duck Congress to avert the “fiscal cliff,” the temporary two percent reduction in the Social Security tax rate that was in effect for two years was allowed to expire. This means that the taxes of every working American just went up, even the 50 percent or so who pay nothing in federal income tax.

Sounds just like what happened under Reagan.
But I thought Reagan was a great tax cutter? True, but he was also a great tax raiser.
Reagan presided over large, necessary, and beneficial reductions in federal income tax rates. For this we can praise him. But he also presided over three destructive tax increases related to Social Security

[WTF]

Originally Posted by WTF

He fucking sure signed it into law , just like Reagan did!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/01/l...ecurity-taxes/

. This means that the taxes of every working American just went up, even the 50 percent or so who pay nothing in federal income tax.

Sounds just like what happened under Reagan.
But I thought Reagan was a great tax cutter? True, but he was also a great tax raiser.
Reagan presided over large, necessary, and beneficial reductions in federal income tax rates. For this we can praise him. But he also presided over three destructive tax increases related to Social Security

Just in case Lexus and Lustyladyboy do not understand wtf this means, I will be happy to explain it to you two if you ask , "Pretty Please".

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by WTF

But I thought Reagan was a great tax cutter? True, but he was also a great tax raiser.
Reagan presided over large, necessary, and beneficial reductions in federal income tax rates. For this we can praise him. But he also presided over three destructive tax increases related to Social Security

Originally Posted by WTF

Just in case Lexus and Lustyladyboy do not understand wtf this means, I will be happy to explain it to you two if you ask , "Pretty Please".

Hey WTFagboy, you do understand that if you keep bending over, you will get reamed again and again, don't you?

Since you are obsessed with Social Security taxes, you do know that Jimmy Carter is the one who put them on an upward spiral. Reagan just accelerated some of the SS tax hikes that were already scheduled to kick in (thanks to your peanut farmer pal). The employee withholding rate rose from 5.35% when Reagan took office to 6.06% when he left. If this was so “destructive”, then why did the economy boom from 1982 to 1989? How did our real GNP grow twice as fast as it has under the current Odumbo recovery? Chew on that one, fagboy.

Your tranny partner CBJerkme demonstrated (again) what a moron he is when he claimed nobody can measure the impact of tax changes. Then he stumbled onto some numbers on a libtard blogsite and posted them here, thereby shooting himself in the foot and refuting his own claim. He handed his own ass to himself - that's sweet. Not the first time either. Funny how you and your tranny partner can't answer the question whether Reagan cut taxes or raised them on a net basis. The facts don't fit into your narrative of Ronnie the hypocrite, do they?

Here is your homework assignment, tranny boys. Read the following US Treasury analysis. It estimated the revenue impact of the 1981 Reagan tax cuts four years after enactment was -$176.7 billion. By comparison, the impact of the 1983 SS tax increases was +$11.4 billion. In other words, the tax cuts were 15 times larger than the SS tax increases, four years after enactment...

Oh yeah, that clever ol' Ronnie, he threw everyone a meatless bone, hahaha... he put a few dollars into one pocket and took it all back from the second pocket, and everyone was too dumb to notice...

And libtard fagboys like WTF and CBJackass are too stupid and lazy to look up the facts...

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-cen...ents/ota81.pdf

[WTF]

Originally Posted by lustylad

. If this was so “destructive”, then why did the economy boom from 1982 to 1989? How did our real GNP grow twice as fast as it has under the current Odumbo recovery? Chew on that one, fagboy. The economy boomed because Paul Volcker was hired by Carter and retained by Reagan. Volker had increased interest rates so high that people saved. Once the natural business cycle turned around people were flush with cash. They were able to pay off their home loans with inflated dollars. Had Obama hired Volcker maybe we would have had the same recovery but it is ignorant to compare the two and come up with your conclusion.



Here is your homework assignment, tranny boys. Read the following US Treasury analysis. It estimated the revenue impact of the 1981 Reagan tax cuts four years after enactment was -$176.7 billion. By comparison, the impact of the 1983 SS tax increases was +$11.4 billion. In other words, the tax cuts were 15 times larger than the SS tax increases, four years after enactment...

You do not understand. Ronnie cut the tax rate (a rate to high {we've already discussed this}) . That does not mean a tax rate cut will automatically increase tax revenues.

What Reagan did was lower the tax rate, he then increased SS rate and continued to spend more. He doubled the national debt. You do understand that right? While that combination looks good for the short term , it has devastating long term implications. For one, numbnuts like you think all we have to do is cut taxes to swell the Treasury's coffers. Second because we have combined the books with SS, Presidents try and paint a rosier picture than what it actually is. Clinton had no surplus.....he had SS which looked like a surplus but in reality was leaving it with IOU's.

What both parties have done is promise folks a retirement package and instead of raising taxes or cutting spending they have raided SS and at some point these folks will not get that retirement package. Now it is the ignorant folks fault because they have wanted lower taxes and politicians give the voters wtf they want.

It is no different than say a company CEO getting paid millions in good times , yet he has taken the workers pension savings and spent it making the books look good. Company goes bankrupt and the workers get pennies on the dollar. That is Reagan in a nutshell. A three card Monty player , fooling dumbass's like you for eternity.





http://www.treasury.gov/resource-cen...ents/ota81.pdf

BTW...

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/01/l...ecurity-taxes/

Although the rate was 10.7 percent when he took office and 12.12 percent when he left, he was not responsible for raising it from 10.7 percent but he was responsible for raising it above 12.12 percent after he left office. Let me explain.

It was also under Reagan and the 1983 Social Security amendments that Social Security benefits began to be taxed. So even though income tax rates didn’t go up, some people on Social Security paid more in income tax because their Social Security benefits were now counted as income. Up to 50 percent of Social Security benefits were taxable. That figure is now up to 85 percent