The historical ignorance of Barack Obama

During the President's Osawatomie, Kansas speech he made several remarks that have no basis in historical fact. It was a theme that he continually underscored which in reality was the complete opposite of what actually occured.

If we just cut more regulations and cut more taxes — especially for the wealthy — our economy will grow stronger. Sure, they say, there will be winners and losers. But if the winners do really well, then jobs and prosperity will eventually trickle down to everybody else. And, they argue, even if prosperity doesn’t trickle down, well, that’s the price of liberty.

Now, it’s a simple theory. And we have to admit, it’s one that speaks to our rugged individualism and our healthy skepticism of too much government. That’s in America’s DNA. And that theory fits well on a bumper sticker. But here’s the problem: It doesn’t work. It has never worked. (Applause.) It didn’t work when it was tried in the decade before the Great Depression.

As the Great Depression occured 1929 the 'decade before' would obviously be the 1920's. President Harding, along with Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon, cut marginal tax rates from 70% to 25% by 1925. This led to unprecedented growth as the Gross Domestic Product averaged 4.2% for the decade (using Historical Statistics of the United States, or HSUS data). There is a reason it was claled the 'Roaring Twneties'.

After World War II tax rates rose to more the 90%. These were eventually cut by President Kennedy's posthumus tax bill in 1964. Gross Domestic Product rose in the four years after the tax cut by 5.1%. Unemployment fell to 3.9% compared to 5.8% in the four years prior to the tax cut.

In the 1980's President Reagan cut marginal tax rates from 70% to eventually 28%. Real Gross Domestic Product, which was .9% in the years 1978-1982 rose to 4.8% in 1983-1986 and unemployment, which stood at 9.7% in 1982, fell to 5.2% by the end of his second term.

Tax cuts enacted by President Bush beginning in 2001 led Gross Domestic Product to more than triple, from 1% to over 3%, by 2004-5. Unemployment fell from 6.0% in 2003 to 4.6% in 2007.

President Obama can not ignore the historical fact that tax cuts in times of economic maliase led to prosperity for all Americans on four seperate occasions and was a policy enacted by both Republicans and Democrats. The past record of success by previous administrations has been conveniently glossed-over in what was obviously a speech high on hyperbole and low on historical accuracy.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

your post is based directly on a giant manipulation and a lie i will quote a reply in another thread about this exact topic to show you the truth.

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by Misoir
Obama: Limited Gov't That Preserves Free Markets 'Doesn't Work. It Has Never Worked'

In a speech delivered at Osawatomie High School in Osawatomie, Kansas, on Tuesday, President Barack Obama argued that while a limited government that preserves free markets "speaks to our rugged individualism" as Americans, such a system "doesn't work" and "has never worked" and that Americans must look to a more activist government that taxes more, spends more and regulates more if they want to preserve the middle class...

"Now, it’s a simple theory," said Obama. "And we have to admit, it’s one that speaks to our rugged individualism and our healthy skepticism of too much government. That’s in America’s DNA. And that theory fits well on a bumper sticker. But here’s the problem: It doesn’t work. It has never worked.

Wow...BS and chop up quotes much?

He wasn't talking about free markets...he was talking about trickle down theorey.

Now, just as there was in Teddy Roosevelt’s time, there is a certain crowd in Washington who, for the last few decades, have said, let’s respond to this economic challenge with the same old tune. “The market will take care of everything,” they tell us.

If we just cut more regulations and cut more taxes -- especially for the wealthy -- our economy will grow stronger.

Sure, they say, there will be winners and losers.

But if the winners do really well, then jobs and prosperity will eventually trickle down to everybody else. And, they argue, even if prosperity doesn’t trickle down, well, that’s the price of liberty.

Now, it’s a simple theory. And we have to admit, it’s one that speaks to our rugged individualism and our healthy skepticism of too much government. That’s in America’s DNA. And that theory fits well on a bumper sticker. (Laughter.) But here’s the problem: It doesn’t work. It has never worked. (Applause.) It didn’t work when it was tried in the decade before the Great Depression. It’s not what led to the incredible postwar booms of the ‘50s and ‘60s. And it didn’t work when we tried it during the last decade. (Applause.) I mean, understand, it’s not as if we haven’t tried this theory.

www.politicalruminations.com...

Your source article is false, misleading, dishonest along with your OP title.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

now

www.whitehouse.gov/live

Obama to make public statement shortly
2011-12-17 16:11 (UTC)


www.xe.com/news/2011/12/17/2354405.htm

WASHINGTON, Dec 17 (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama planned on Saturday to make a public statement, the White House said shortly after the Senate voted to extend a payroll tax cut for workers by two months.

Obama will speak at 12:30 EST (1730 GMT).

(Reporting By Caren Bohan) Keywords: USA TAXES/OBAMA STATEMENT

(...)

Sheesh you expect a non american to know american history ?

Peace

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
I'm not an economist. I can't argue the benefits of trickle down. I wish I could.

But to be simple, the fact remains that a government, any government, that justifies itself by taking from the people they are supposed to serve, is a government that needs to be stopped.

This kenesian approach to the economy will just open the door to socialism, nationalism, more government control.

Here is the complete transcript from whitehouse.gov:

www.whitehouse.gov...

Overall, Obama gives great speeches, but he lacks the ability to make decisions on how to accomplish any of these great goals.

Let's take a look at a few things he says...

Which means we shouldn’t be laying off good teachers right now -- we should be hiring them. (Applause.) We shouldn’t be expecting less of our schools –- we should be demanding more. (Applause.) We shouldn’t be making it harder to afford college -- we should be a country where everyone has a chance to go and doesn’t rack up $100,000 of debt just because they went. (Applause.)

Sounds great! How do we do that? What are you going to do to lower the cost of education? To some degree, wouldn't it require regulating negotiations with unions and pension plans, etc.?

In today’s innovation economy, we also need a world-class commitment to science and research, the next generation of high-tech manufacturing. Our factories and our workers shouldn’t be idle. We should be giving people the chance to get new skills and training at community colleges so they can learn how to make wind turbines and semiconductors and high-powered batteries. And by the way, if we don’t have an economy that’s built on bubbles and financial speculation, our best and brightest won’t all gravitate towards careers in banking and finance. (Applause.) Because if we want an economy that’s built to last, we need more of those young people in science and engineering. (Applause.) This country should not be known for bad debt and phony profits. We should be known for creating and selling products all around the world that are stamped with three proud words: Made in America. (Applause.)

Sounds great again! What are you going to do in order to provide incentives towards science, research and engineering educations? If you're promoting jobs and "Made in America", shouldn't you start by firing your top jobs advisor, Jeffrey Immelt with GE? Who continually sends GE jobs to China?

Today that choice is very clear. To reduce our deficit, I’ve already signed nearly $1 trillion of spending cuts into law and I’ve proposed trillions more, including reforms that would lower the cost of Medicare and Medicaid.

$1 Trillion in spending cuts isn't crap when you're overspending by $1.3 Trillion EVERY YEAR! Let's be honest shall we? Your reforms and lower costs to Medicare and Medicaid are only being transferred over to pay for OBAMACARE! Just as much spending. No reduction.

The problem is that the Obama admin, and elites in government pushed forward with massive spending and government growth agendas in a time of economic decline and expected the expiration of tax cuts to offset their spending and growth plans.

In future history that will prove a fatal blow to his legacy... A painful lesson for Americans about the downsides of a "tax and spend" socialist government, and the real cost of lost liberty and freedom.

Changing history now or in the future wont change what is happening and will happen as a result of incompetence, ignorance that has only facilitated a corrupt government and exploited its citizens with a burden of debt that will take several decades to recover from, if ever... Along with economically destructive trade and regulatory policies we may have to go through another "great depression" before this all turns around.

Originally posted by CaDreamer
your post is based directly on a giant manipulation and a lie...

Well then, if it is a 'giant manipulation and a lie' it should be quite easy for you to post contradictory Gross Domestic Product and unemployment figures. I suspect, however, that these will be conspicously unavailable.

Continued from last post....

But in order to structurally close the deficit, get our fiscal house in order, we have to decide what our priorities are. Now, most immediately, short term, we need to extend a payroll tax cut that’s set to expire at the end of this month. (Applause.) If we don’t do that, 160 million Americans, including most of the people here, will see their taxes go up by an average of $1,000 starting in January and it would badly weaken our recovery. That’s the short term.

Sounds good. But how do you make up the difference in the lower amounts of Social Security being taken out of paychecks while Social Security recipients just received a 3.6%(?) increase for 2012? Did that tax on the wealthy already go into affect and I missed it?

But part of the deal was that we wouldn’t go back to business as usual. And that’s why last year we put in place new rules of the road that refocus the financial sector on what should be their core purpose: getting capital to the entrepreneurs with the best ideas, and financing millions of families who want to buy a home or send their kids to college.

Now, we’re not all the way there yet, and the banks are fighting us every inch of the way. But already, some of these reforms are being implemented. If you’re a big bank or risky financial institution, you now have to write out a “living will” that details exactly how you’ll pay the bills if you fail, so that taxpayers are never again on the hook for Wall Street’s mistakes. (Applause.)

There are also limits on the size of banks and new abilities for regulators to dismantle a firm that is going under. The new law bans banks from making risky bets with their customers’ deposits, and it takes away big bonuses and paydays from failed CEOs, while giving shareholders a say on executive salaries.

This is the law that we passed. We are in the process of implementing it now. All of this is being put in place as we speak. Now, unless you’re a financial institution whose business model is built on breaking the law, cheating consumers and making risky bets that could damage the entire economy, you should have nothing to fear from these new rules.

OK, I just had to post the above quote so I could get a dose of good laughter for the day!

We shouldn’t be weakening oversight and accountability. We should be strengthening oversight and accountability. I’ll give you another example. Too often, we’ve seen Wall Street firms violating major anti-fraud laws because the penalties are too weak and there’s no price for being a repeat offender. No more. I’ll be calling for legislation that makes those penalties count so that firms don’t see punishment for breaking the law as just the price of doing business. (Applause.)

I'll believe it when I see it!!!

Now, at Marvin’s when times get tough, the workers agree to give up some perks and some pay, and so do the owners. As one owner said, “You can’t grow if you’re cutting your lifeblood -- and that’s the skills and experience your workforce delivers.” (Applause.) For the CEO of Marvin’s, it’s about the community. He said, “These are people we went to school with. We go to church with them. We see them in the same restaurants. Indeed, a lot of us have married local girls and boys. We could be anywhere, but we are in Warroad.”

Don't waste your breath on us with this one, tell it to the unions!

And well into our third century as a nation, we have grown and we’ve changed in many ways since Roosevelt’s time. The world is faster and the playing field is larger and the challenges are more complex. But what hasn’t changed -- what can never change -- are the values that got us this far. We still have a stake in each other’s success. We still believe that this should be a place where you can make it if you try. And we still believe, in the words of the man who called for a New Nationalism all those years ago, “The fundamental rule of our national life,” he said, “the rule which underlies all others -- is that, on the whole, and in the long run, we shall go up or down together.” And I believe America is on the way up. (Applause.)

If you really believed that, you'd step up and act more like a leader instead of ignoring everyone and letting Congress work it out amongst themselves.

Oh, and backing up some of these statements with some ideas on how to accomplish these goals would help point you in that direction. Going on and on about raising taxes on the wealthy is just a band-aid to this mess. Where are those tax reforms that you keep speaking about?

Originally posted by beezzer
But to be simple, the fact remains that a government, any government, that justifies itself by taking from the people they are supposed to serve, is a government that needs to be stopped.

It also, as history has borne out, led to lower productivity and higher unemployment.

Originally posted by ProRipp
Sheesh you expect a non american to know american history ?

Peace

You and the OP,,,,, one in the same.

SMH.

Did you even read the material?

Just ignorant.

Sheesh!

Originally posted by PLASIFISK
Did you even read the material?

Obviously, otherwise how could I have noticed the President's glaring historical errors?

Just ignorant.

Do you have anything other than your opinion to counter the data?

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Its already been countered. Look up from here a few post and you will see. Then again, with you being an Obama basher and all, the fact of it being countered means nothing. Given the lengths your kind will go in an attempt push your lies onto others, this thread is not surprising at all.


My opinion stands.

Originally posted by PLASIFISK
Its already been countered. Look up from here a few post and you will see.

There was nothing in that link that offered contradictory data. You would have known that if you actually clicked on it instead of assuming otherwise. I will wait patiently for you to provide numbers that refute what I posted earlier.

Then again, with you being an Obama basher and all, the fact of it being countered means nothing.

Partisan politics are not at issue here. The President's either ignorant or purposeful (even worse) historical ommissions are the issue.

Given the lengths your kind will go in an attempt push your lies onto others, this thread is not surprising at all.

Once again, if the data is incorrect and I am 'lieing' then it will be quite easy for you to post data that disproves mine.

My opinion stands.

Your opinion is totally and woefully irrelevant. The numbers are accurate.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Soapbox moments....... Enjoy.

Again, my opinion stands.

You are what you are. Obama basher.

And im no supporter or basher.

I am not a follower either. It seems the Bash Obama movement is doing pretty well these days.

Excuse me while I step away from your soapbox. Sorry for the interuption.

(walks over to the group of people who actually make a difference in the world. Not because of what they say, but because of what they do!)

Ahhhh refreashing. Sane people.

GDP is a bad way to measure anything. It takes all transactions positive or negative and adds them together for a total the same way the bankers do. But if you balanced your check book that way you would be locked up for bouncing checks.
I spend a hundred dollars + I made a hundred dollars. Bankers math or GDP that measures two hundred dollars. You or I with our check book. You have no money left. And the real bad thing is the banks leverage that fake amount 40 to 1.

Originally posted by PLASIFISK
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

 

Soapbox moments....... Enjoy.

Again, my opinion stand
You are what you are. Obama basher.
And im no supporter or basher.
I am not a follower either. It seems the Bash Obama movement is doing pretty well these days.
Excuse me while I step away from your soapbox. Sorry for the interuption.
(walks over to the group of people who actually make a difference in the world. Not because of what they say, but because of what they do!)
Ahhhh refreashing. Sane people.

So you couldn't back up your claims??

Why not just admit you were wrong rather than this silly rant??

Originally posted by PLASIFISK
Soapbox moments....... Enjoy.

Again, my opinion stands.

You are what you are. Obama basher.

And im no supporter or basher.

I am not a follower either. It seems the Bash Obama movement is doing pretty well these days.

Excuse me while I step away from your soapbox. Sorry for the interuption.

Soapbox? This was a presentation of numbers disproving what the President claimed and what you failed to counter with evidence and instead resorted to rhetoric....again. Project much?

Originally posted by JBA2848
GDP is a bad way to measure anything. It takes all transactions positive or negative and adds them together for a total the same way the bankers do. But if you balanced your check book that way you would be locked up for bouncing checks.
I spend a hundred dollars + I made a hundred dollars.

That is incorrect. The formulas used to measure gross domestic product are quite simple.

For example, here is the expenditure method:

gross domestic product = private consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports)

They are never in the negative nor could they ever be, they are only up or down relative to the preceeding year's figure.

Another thread bashing Obama that has to resort to lies and a presentation of "facts" that are not the least bit accurate. Is Obama really doing this well?