Obama Sets Another Record!

You two really seem to be talking past one another here. It seems you both understand the diff between defecit and debt.
Not to put words into COG's mouth but it seems to me he was saying that even though Keynes was in favor of defecit spending, in light of the 15 trillion debt we have, he wouldn't want to keep borrowing.
There is also no such thing as "trickle down economics". No books written, no classes offered. I believe what you're referencing is "supply side economics" and it was used to great effect by both Clinton and Kenedy. Originally Posted by Ducbutter

Clinton raised marginal tax rates , and Kennedy was a supply sider? ... lol.

then theres this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply-...orical_origins

Clinton raised marginal tax rates , and Kennedy was a supply sider? ... lol.

then theres this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply-...orical_origins Originally Posted by CJ7

From the article you quoted:

"Proponents of supply-side economics blame the 1991 recession on the Federal Reserve, and argue that Clinton's tax increases, since they did not change marginal capital gains tax rates, left the supply-side nature of the 1986 tax bill in place."

As for Kennedy, I recognize that the tax cuts he advocated were passed posthumously, and there's debate on whether they were supply or demand side. The point though, is that tax rates were cut in '64 and revenues increased. Not all tax cuts are bad, any more than they are all good, Si ?

From the article you quoted:

"Proponents of supply-side economics blame the 1991 recession on the Federal Reserve, and argue that Clinton's tax increases, since they did not change marginal capital gains tax rates, left the supply-side nature of the 1986 tax bill in place."

As for Kennedy, I recognize that the tax cuts he advocated were passed posthumously, and there's debate on whether they were supply or demand side. The point though, is that tax rates were cut in '64 and revenues increased. Not all tax cuts are bad, any more than they are all good, Si ? Originally Posted by Ducbutter

The 1993 Clinton tax increase raised the top two income tax rates to 36% and 39.6%, with the top rate hitting joint returns with incomes above $250,000 ($400,000 in 2012 dollars). In addition, it removed the cap on the 2.9% Medicare payroll tax, raised the corporate tax rate to 35% from 34%, increased the taxable portion of Social Security benefits, and imposed a 4.3 cent per gallon increase in transportation fuel taxes.

thats not supply side economics ...

The 1993 Clinton tax increase raised the top two income tax rates to 36% and 39.6%, with the top rate hitting joint returns with incomes above $250,000 ($400,000 in 2012 dollars). In addition, it removed the cap on the 2.9% Medicare payroll tax, raised the corporate tax rate to 35% from 34%, increased the taxable portion of Social Security benefits, and imposed a 4.3 cent per gallon increase in transportation fuel taxes.

thats not supply side economics ... Originally Posted by CJ7

You're correct, but him leaving cap gains alone was supply side. It was kind of a mixed bag. By leaving cap gains at their then existing levels he helped fuel the whole dotcom business explosion. And his foray into the world of supply side served him and the economy well.

You're correct, but him leaving cap gains alone was supply side. It was kind of a mixed bag. By leaving cap gains at their then existing levels he helped fuel the whole dotcom business explosion. And his foray into the world of supply side served him and the economy well. Originally Posted by Ducbutter

Bush 41 raised cap gains taxes after Reagan, thats not supply side economics either ... had Clinton cut said cap gains taxes Bush 41 raised that would have been supply side economics ..

simply leaving a tax in place doesnt constitute supply side economcs especially when that tax had been raised by the last president.


Ive just been notified ...


Bush I did not raise the cap gains tax (Reagan did in 1986, from 20% to 28% as part of the 1986 tax reform). Clinton (with congress, of course, but he signed the package in 1997) cut the rate back to 20%. It was at 28%, if I recall correctly, from 1986 or 1987 until 1997 ..


an aside, IMO raising a bevy of taxes and cutting the cap gains tax like Clinton apparently did, still doesnt constitute supply side economics ... call it what you will.

I never mentioned 41. Not germane to this discussion.
I believe Bubba left cap gains alone, when he raised everything else, for a reason. To me that's considering the supply side of the equation. I never said the guy was Milton Friedman. But if you want, I cede you the point.
Now consider the '64 tax cuts supported by JFK and passed under LBJ. Cut the corporate tax rates and cap gains. Supply side or not?

I never mentioned 41. Not germane to this discussion.
I believe Bubba left cap gains alone, when he raised everything else, for a reason. To me that's considering the supply side of the equation. I never said the guy was Milton Friedman. But if you want, I cede you the point.
Now consider the '64 tax cuts supported by JFK and passed under LBJ. Cut the corporate tax rates and cap gains. Supply side or not? Originally Posted by Ducbutter

sorry, notice my above comment after the edit.


supply side economics was based on the Laffer curve which came into being in 1979, before that taxes were cut/raised or left standing ...

Nothing to appologize for, man. That's just good healthy debate.

I'm not sure what you're getting at though, with your comment about the Laffer curve.