"It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are
too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut
the rates now ... Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to
achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget
surplus."

"Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the
levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an
increased - not a reduced - flow of revenues to the federal government."

"In today's economy, fiscal prudence and responsibility call for tax
reduction even if it temporarily enlarges the federal deficit - why reducing
taxes is the best way open to us to increase revenues."

"It is no contradiction - the most important single thing we can do to
stimulate investment in today's economy is to raise consumption by major
reduction of individual income tax rates."

"Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share
of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for
risk, investment and effort - thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling
our national growth rate."

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a
balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money
left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education
and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his
profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his
business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will
ultimately end up with more revenues."

"In those countries where income taxes are lower than in the United States,
the ability to defer the payment of U.S. tax by retaining income in the
subsidiary companies provides a tax advantage for companies operating
through overseas subsidiaries that is not available to companies operating
solely in the United States. Many American investors properly made use of
this deferral in the conduct of their foreign investment."

"In short, it is a paradoxical truth that ... the soundest way to raise the
revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now. The experience of a number
of European countries and Japan have borne this out. This country's own
experience with tax reduction (nine years ago) has borne this out. And the
reason is that only full employment can balance the budget, and tax
reduction can pave the way to that employment. The purpose of cutting taxes
now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous,
expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus."




--
The Tea Party that counts is November 2, 2010

"Lu Powell" wrote in message
...
"It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues
are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is
to cut the rates now ... Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget
deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can
bring a budget surplus."

"Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the
levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an
increased - not a reduced - flow of revenues to the federal government."

"In today's economy, fiscal prudence and responsibility call for tax
reduction even if it temporarily enlarges the federal deficit - why
reducing taxes is the best way open to us to increase revenues."

"It is no contradiction - the most important single thing we can do to
stimulate investment in today's economy is to raise consumption by major
reduction of individual income tax rates."

"Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share
of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for
risk, investment and effort - thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling
our national growth rate."

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a
balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more
money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences,
education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage
of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or
improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal
government will ultimately end up with more revenues."

"In those countries where income taxes are lower than in the United
States, the ability to defer the payment of U.S. tax by retaining income
in the subsidiary companies provides a tax advantage for companies
operating through overseas subsidiaries that is not available to companies
operating solely in the United States. Many American investors properly
made use of this deferral in the conduct of their foreign investment."

"In short, it is a paradoxical truth that ... the soundest way to raise
the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now. The experience of a
number of European countries and Japan have borne this out. This country's
own experience with tax reduction (nine years ago) has borne this out. And
the reason is that only full employment can balance the budget, and tax
reduction can pave the way to that employment. The purpose of cutting
taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more
prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus."


Are you afraid of the attribution? (Hint: google works)

--
Nom=de=Plume

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 21:33:50 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


Are you afraid of the attribution? (Hint: google works)

I never heard of the guy.

One thing that strikes me is deficit spending only works if it
actually creates LONG TERM jobs for marginally qualified people.
Things like clunker employ a factory for a month, then what? That is
the classic "give a man a fish".

We better find something we can make here ... fast.


It's also about infrastructre renewal. This is what FDR did and it was
working. The clunker program worked in a short term way, but you're right,
we need more long-term projects. The stim plan does have provisions for
infrastructure spending, and the money is starting to arrive.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On 11/8/09 2:16 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 21:33:50 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


Are you afraid of the attribution? (Hint: google works)

I never heard of the guy.

One thing that strikes me is deficit spending only works if it
actually creates LONG TERM jobs for marginally qualified people.
Things like clunker employ a factory for a month, then what? That is
the classic "give a man a fish".

We better find something we can make here ... fast.


It's also about infrastructre renewal. This is what FDR did and it was
working. The clunker program worked in a short term way, but you're right,
we need more long-term projects. The stim plan does have provisions for
infrastructure spending, and the money is starting to arrive.



We could have the unemployed round up the obstructionist
Republicans/Conservatives and...

Naw. Too German...

Lu Powell wrote:
"It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues
are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run
is to cut the rates now ... Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget
deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can
bring a budget surplus."

"Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise
the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few
years an increased - not a reduced - flow of revenues to the federal
government."

"In today's economy, fiscal prudence and responsibility call for tax
reduction even if it temporarily enlarges the federal deficit - why
reducing taxes is the best way open to us to increase revenues."

"It is no contradiction - the most important single thing we can do to
stimulate investment in today's economy is to raise consumption by major
reduction of individual income tax rates."

"Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a
share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the
incentive for risk, investment and effort - thereby aborting our
recoveries and stifling our national growth rate."

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a
balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more
money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences,
education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage
of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or
improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal
government will ultimately end up with more revenues."

"In those countries where income taxes are lower than in the United
States, the ability to defer the payment of U.S. tax by retaining income
in the subsidiary companies provides a tax advantage for companies
operating through overseas subsidiaries that is not available to
companies operating solely in the United States. Many American investors
properly made use of this deferral in the conduct of their foreign
investment."

"In short, it is a paradoxical truth that ... the soundest way to raise
the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now. The experience of
a number of European countries and Japan have borne this out. This
country's own experience with tax reduction (nine years ago) has borne
this out. And the reason is that only full employment can balance the
budget, and tax reduction can pave the way to that employment. The
purpose of cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to
achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget
surplus."





Your tax cut method to prosperity has been discredited. If it were so,
Bush wouldn't have left office with a 1.2 trillion dollar debt after
starting off with a huge surplus.

It was good for those who ran through the treasury barefoot and had a
party with YOUR money, but you don't seem to care, as long as it was
stolen by a Republican money redistributing machine. Give to the rich!
That'll make me rich too!

In short:
What they left behind isn't prosperity, but debt.

Why you continually throw stones at everyone except Bush amazes me. He
deserves it. Obama is our only hope when the best you guys can do is
bring us Sara Palin.

In article ,
says...


Your tax cut method to prosperity has been discredited. If it were so,
Bush wouldn't have left office with a 1.2 trillion dollar debt after
starting off with a huge surplus.

My financial adviser has yet to tell me that the best way for me to pad
my retirement account is to go into debt.

I haven't heard anybody in the financial industry tell people that they
need to go further debut to prevent themselves from going bankrupt.

It was good for those who ran through the treasury barefoot and had a
party with YOUR money, but you don't seem to care, as long as it was
stolen by a Republican money redistributing machine. Give to the rich!
That'll make me rich too!

$1.2 Trillion dollars in 9 months dwarfs all of the debut from Bush's 8
years

In short:
What they left behind isn't prosperity, but debt.

True. But, you can't get out of debt by going further into debt. Many
people have tried and have a bankruptcy on their credit report that
hangs heavily over all of their fanancial affairs for the rest of their
lives.

Why you continually throw stones at everyone except Bush amazes me. He
deserves it. Obama is our only hope when the best you guys can do is
bring us Sara Palin.

Bush was stupid to keep the veto pen in his desk.

Obama is a tax and spend liberal in the worst way. The fact that you
can't see is all of our problem.

Obama will be the downfall of all of us. The sooner we get someone like
Palin in office who expouses personal responsibility the better off we
all will be.

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
says...


Your tax cut method to prosperity has been discredited. If it were so,
Bush wouldn't have left office with a 1.2 trillion dollar debt after
starting off with a huge surplus.

My financial adviser has yet to tell me that the best way for me to pad
my retirement account is to go into debt.

I haven't heard anybody in the financial industry tell people that they
need to go further debut to prevent themselves from going bankrupt.

It was good for those who ran through the treasury barefoot and had a
party with YOUR money, but you don't seem to care, as long as it was
stolen by a Republican money redistributing machine. Give to the rich!
That'll make me rich too!

$1.2 Trillion dollars in 9 months dwarfs all of the debut from Bush's 8
years

In short:
What they left behind isn't prosperity, but debt.

True. But, you can't get out of debt by going further into debt. Many
people have tried and have a bankruptcy on their credit report that
hangs heavily over all of their fanancial affairs for the rest of their
lives.

Why you continually throw stones at everyone except Bush amazes me. He
deserves it. Obama is our only hope when the best you guys can do is
bring us Sara Palin.

Bush was stupid to keep the veto pen in his desk.

Obama is a tax and spend liberal in the worst way. The fact that you
can't see is all of our problem.

Obama will be the downfall of all of us. The sooner we get someone like
Palin in office who expouses personal responsibility the better off we
all will be.




Amen to your comments. I quit supporting Bush and the
Republicans when they started spending like Democrats.

BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...
Your tax cut method to prosperity has been discredited. If it were so,
Bush wouldn't have left office with a 1.2 trillion dollar debt after
starting off with a huge surplus.

My financial adviser has yet to tell me that the best way for me to pad
my retirement account is to go into debt.

I haven't heard anybody in the financial industry tell people that they
need to go further debut to prevent themselves from going bankrupt.

It was good for those who ran through the treasury barefoot and had a
party with YOUR money, but you don't seem to care, as long as it was
stolen by a Republican money redistributing machine. Give to the rich!
That'll make me rich too!

$1.2 Trillion dollars in 9 months dwarfs all of the debut from Bush's 8
years

In short:
What they left behind isn't prosperity, but debt.

True. But, you can't get out of debt by going further into debt. Many
people have tried and have a bankruptcy on their credit report that
hangs heavily over all of their fanancial affairs for the rest of their
lives.

Why you continually throw stones at everyone except Bush amazes me. He
deserves it. Obama is our only hope when the best you guys can do is
bring us Sara Palin.

Bush was stupid to keep the veto pen in his desk.

Obama is a tax and spend liberal in the worst way. The fact that you
can't see is all of our problem.

Obama will be the downfall of all of us. The sooner we get someone like
Palin in office who expouses personal responsibility the better off we
all will be.



You're wasting your breath arguing with these bozos here on rec.boats.
They are still trying to crucify Bush instead of concentrating on fixing
the real problem, which is Obamas entourage and the entire congress.
We should be able to address part of the problem next November. And if
obama doesn't shape up he will be out too. Palin couldn't be any worse
than what we have now.

On Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:23:02 -0500, BAR wrote:


$1.2 Trillion dollars in 9 months dwarfs all of the debut from Bush's 8
years

In point of fact, that is just not true. Bush added $5 trillion to the
debt.

UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE: See below


"Jim" wrote in message
...
BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...
Your tax cut method to prosperity has been discredited. If it were so,
Bush wouldn't have left office with a 1.2 trillion dollar debt after
starting off with a huge surplus.

My financial adviser has yet to tell me that the best way for me to pad
my retirement account is to go into debt. I haven't heard anybody in the
financial industry tell people that they need to go further debut to
prevent themselves from going bankrupt.

It was good for those who ran through the treasury barefoot and had a
party with YOUR money, but you don't seem to care, as long as it was
stolen by a Republican money redistributing machine. Give to the rich!
That'll make me rich too!

$1.2 Trillion dollars in 9 months dwarfs all of the debut from Bush's 8
years

In short:
What they left behind isn't prosperity, but debt.

True. But, you can't get out of debt by going further into debt. Many
people have tried and have a bankruptcy on their credit report that hangs
heavily over all of their fanancial affairs for the rest of their lives.
Why you continually throw stones at everyone except Bush amazes me. He
deserves it. Obama is our only hope when the best you guys can do is
bring us Sara Palin.

Bush was stupid to keep the veto pen in his desk. Obama is a tax and
spend liberal in the worst way. The fact that you can't see is all of our
problem. Obama will be the downfall of all of us. The sooner we get
someone like Palin in office who expouses personal responsibility the
better off we all will be.
You're wasting your breath arguing with these bozos here on rec.boats.
They are still trying to crucify Bush instead of concentrating on fixing
the real problem, which is Obamas entourage and the entire congress. We
should be able to address part of the problem next November. And if obama
doesn't shape up he will be out too. Palin couldn't be any worse than what
we have now.

I no longer argue with the bozo Dims.

The quotes in my original post was from speeches by John F. Kennedy, made to
Congress and other groups between 1961 and 1963.

His positions were prophetic and correct. It was tragic he didn't live long
enough to see the benefits of his foresight.

Too bad the largesse from his tax cuts was spent on LBJ's Vietnam war and
his Great Society.

Too bad the Dims continue to engage in class warfare for their own sake, and
contrary to what is good for the country.