"Falling off a cliff "

"Falling off a cliff "

There are 6 comments on the Lake County Record-Bee story from Mar 30, 2009, titled "Falling off a cliff ". In it, Lake County Record-Bee reports that:

It was April 8, 1987. I slid into the comfortable chair in the modest office of my tax accountant.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Lake County Record-Bee.

Greater Artist

United States

#1 Mar 31, 2009
Great Article!

I believe the Regan knew perfectly well what he was doing and what would come from removing the security of law (firewalls)... That's why FIREWALLS are set in computers... and the government is a machine of sorts. They (the politicians are officials in a state roll governing). They are suppose to serve the democracy productive growth. When unchecked or deregulated, well today's the way it is...How do you like the results of Reaganomics?

When the horse is doped the race is fixed. AGI, Enron,Merck Madoff, Ben Franklin savings and loan... 80's massive non profit organization introductions...

The lobbyists were given a amphetamine field kit and pork (aka Earmarks) were the results..

Deregulation means exactly that. That's why we have laws (Firewalls) to keep corruption in check, due to ignorant greed, in this case executive corporate greed fueling the ego and tempting the weak personality to think, with enough loot I will be untouchable

We've seen it all through the 80's whit the grand church leaders like the Bakers etc...

Since: Nov 08

Santa Rosa, CA

#2 Mar 31, 2009
I never would have imagined that one lady could drink a gallon of DNC Koolaid in one gulp, but here it is! This is the most warped version of our economic history I have ever read. I only heard something like this at an Iron Worker's Picnic when the beer had run out and just before the big fight started.

Please read Jude Wanniski's "The Way the World Works" and John T. Flynn's "The Roosevelt Myth" if you want to get a real handle on The New Deal.

The New Deal was a disaster that increased unemployment from 12 to 25.3% when instituted. After eight years of it Henry Morganthau, FDR's Secretary of the Treasury tearfully told a House committee of Congress that the New Deal was an utter failure and that after eight years unemployment was still in double digits. That day in May 1938 the US Supreme Court found the National Recovery Administration was unconstitutional and started dismantling the New Deal which lead to our recovery with a lot of help from WWII. Mr. Obama is following in FDR footprints and we will fail as we never have before because now we have many more and much bigger fools.
nineteen72

Prairie Du Chien, WI

#3 Mar 31, 2009
Who exactly did Reagonomics work for??

if you were a CEO -- woohoo no taxes --
if you were a working man? not so much

The Reagan economy was a one-hit wonder. Yes, there was a boom in the mid-1980s, as the economy recovered from a severe recession. But while the rich got much richer, there was little sustained economic improvement for most Americans. By the late 1980s, middle-class incomes were barely higher than they had been a decade before – and the poverty rate had actually risen.

Fiscal policy discipline was not restored until the Clinton administration; in fact, the deficit kept increasing under the Reagan administration. It was only through the combination of Greenspan and Rubin that the fiscal-monetary nexus managed to secure low inflation, and low interest rates. In other words, we were back to the stability of the postwar world, but it took a quarter century.

If these policies had worked, we would have expected a supply boost. That never materialized, as witnessed by the lousy productivity growth. Instead, the Reagan boom– beloved of the supply side crowd– was simply an aggregate demand response to a very severe recession. It was just a course correction, not an expansion in the pie. The pie only expanded again after 1995, and even then, not to the extent a generation earlier. Clinton, of course, was lucky: his terms of office coincided withe the tech boom which boosted productivity. But macroeconomic stability provided the groundwork.

Go back and do your homework
Krugman
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/opinion/21k...

Since: Nov 08

Santa Rosa, CA

#4 Mar 31, 2009
nineteen72 wrote:
Who exactly did Reagonomics work for??
if you were a CEO -- woohoo no taxes --
if you were a working man? not so much
The Reagan economy was a one-hit wonder. Yes, there was a boom in the mid-1980s, as the economy recovered from a severe recession. But while the rich got much richer, there was little sustained economic improvement for most Americans. By the late 1980s, middle-class incomes were barely higher than they had been a decade before – and the poverty rate had actually risen.
Fiscal policy discipline was not restored until the Clinton administration; in fact, the deficit kept increasing under the Reagan administration. It was only through the combination of Greenspan and Rubin that the fiscal-monetary nexus managed to secure low inflation, and low interest rates. In other words, we were back to the stability of the postwar world, but it took a quarter century.
If these policies had worked, we would have expected a supply boost. That never materialized, as witnessed by the lousy productivity growth. Instead, the Reagan boom– beloved of the supply side crowd– was simply an aggregate demand response to a very severe recession. It was just a course correction, not an expansion in the pie. The pie only expanded again after 1995, and even then, not to the extent a generation earlier. Clinton, of course, was lucky: his terms of office coincided withe the tech boom which boosted productivity. But macroeconomic stability provided the groundwork.
Go back and do your homework
Krugman
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/21/opinion/21k...
If you were a CEO your taxes were still at a rate three times that of the bottom payers. "The rich," top 3% pay 90% of all income taxes. The only fair tax is a flat tax where all pay the same rate, just like sales taxes.

If you tax the daylights out of the people who have the guts, brains and ablities to invent things, have ideas and are willing to risk they will set up foreign corporations for $5,000 each, with $3,000 annual maintenance and pay no taxes whatsoever as they will make everything offshore and only sell it here. If you make the people who you need to create jobs mad they won't do it here, dummies.
geevo

United States

#5 Mar 31, 2009
Yes AV a flat tax would be the best. No deductions and insane accounting practices. Except what would we do with all the accountants and tax preparers since tax filing would be so easy. Also a flat 10% of gross income and let the State and Feds fight over the split. We definitely need a tax revolution in this .

Since: Nov 08

Santa Rosa, CA

#6 Mar 31, 2009
geevo wrote:
Yes AV a flat tax would be the best. No deductions and insane accounting practices. Except what would we do with all the accountants and tax preparers since tax filing would be so easy. Also a flat 10% of gross income and let the State and Feds fight over the split. We definitely need a tax revolution in this .
And don't stop there: I am now waging a battle with the US Patent Office over one of my applications as an Examiner accused me of having copied it "from a foreign document" without citing said document. And, he knocked down one of my Claims because another one using a fictious device yet to be invented and shown on a previous patent in dashed lines with the legend "optional" in some obviates mine, which it would not if it existed, which it does not. And, a couple of other doozies...

I have discovered that nearly all patents filed by inventors without lawyers are flawless where 100% of all filed by attorneys have substantial errors, but the USPTO wants you to use a lawyer. The less apt inventors need lawyers, but attorneys cannot make up for bad concepts, the kind they seem to handle all the time. We live in a bad century.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

The New Deal Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The New Deal Goes South (Jul '13) Jul '13 Terry 1
News Wonkblog book club: "Fear Itself" (Jul '13) Jul '13 Holly 1
News 'New Deal' on hep C (Mar '13) Mar '13 Zellers pharmacy 1
News The Taliban vs. Teenage Girl, Richard Hell, The... (Mar '13) Mar '13 Alex 1
News Political Book Club: A Reading List (Mar '13) Mar '13 Dean 1
News Wynne Liberals plan to continue ONTC fire sale (Mar '13) Mar '13 Dean 1
News Book review: 'The Great Deformation: The Corrup... (Mar '13) Mar '13 Dean 1
More from around the web