Who Said it?

[BigRob]

The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system — and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes to be enacted and become effective in ......

(I hid the year at the end to not make it obvious)

 

[Cruella]

Knowing how he likes to talk out of both sides of his mouth, I'll say it was Obama

 

[dogtowner]

I'll take JFK for $400 Alex

 

[BigRob]

Dog's got it -- it was JFK, speaking in 1962.

 

[Gipper]

Dog's got it -- it was JFK, speaking in 1962.

And there is not ONE national Democrat (really commies) who would utter those words today.

Hell there aren't many Rs (mostly Neocon Progressives) who would utter those words.

And this is why our nation is in such disarray.

 

[Gipper]

No president today would utter these profound words.

A great president did so many years ago. Who?

“Our government rests upon religion. It is from that source that we derive our reverence for truth and justice, for equality and liberality, and for the rights of mankind. Unless the people believe in these principles they cannot believe in our government. There are only two main theories of government in our world. One rests on righteousness and the other on force. One appeals to reason, and the other appeals to the sword. One is exemplified in the republic, the other is represented by despotism.

The government of a country never gets ahead of the religion of a country. There is no way by which we can substitute the authority of law for the virtue of man. Of course we endeavor to restrain the vicious, and furnish a fair degree of security and protection by legislation and police control, but the real reform which society in these days is seeking will come as a result of our religious convictions, or they will not come at all. Peace, justice, humanity, charity—these cannot be legislated into being. They are the result of divine grace.”

 

[PLC1]

No president today would utter these profound words.

A great president did so many years ago. Who?

That would be Calvin Coolidge.

Coolidge restored public confidence in the White House after the scandals of his predecessor's administration, and left office with considerable popularity.[1] As a Coolidge biographer put it, "He embodied the spirit and hopes of the middle class, could interpret their longings and express their opinions. That he did represent the genius of the average is the most convincing proof of his strength."[2] Coolidge praised the achievement of widespread prosperity in 1928, saying: "The requirements of existence have passed beyond the standard of necessity into the region of luxury."[3] Some later criticized Coolidge as part of a general criticism of laissez-faire government.[4] His reputation underwent a renaissance during the Ronald Reagan Administration,[5] but the ultimate assessment of his presidency is still divided between those who approve of his reduction of the size of government programs and those who believe the federal government should be more involved in regulating and controlling the economy.[6]

whose legacy was more one of reducing government than of injecting religion into a secular state.

OK, here's another one:

I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy....
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another; foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passion. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

 

[Gipper]

That would be Calvin Coolidge.



whose legacy was more one of reducing government than of injecting religion into a secular state.

OK, here's another one:

Coolidge never injected religion into the State. But he knew, as did our Founders, that without belief in God America fails to be a free and functioning republic. Today the elites who rule us believe our rights come from the state and not from God. This has resulted in the amazing grow of the state and the equally amazing lessening of individual liberties. The Left has worked diligently to eliminate God and denigrate believers. Thus we now have a large percentage of citizens who do not believe a God exists. This makes it easy for the statists to impose tyranny on us all. When our rights come from the state, the state can take them away.

And your quote is of course George Washington. The greatest of all Americans even still today.

 

[PLC1]

Coolidge never injected religion into the State. But he knew, as did our Founders, that without belief in God America fails to be a free and functioning republic. Today the elites who rule us believe our rights come from the state and not from God. This has resulted in the amazing grow of the state and the equally amazing lessening of individual liberties. The Left has worked diligently to eliminate God and denigrate believers. Thus we now have a large percentage of citizens who do not believe a God exists. This makes it easy for the statists to impose tyranny on us all. When our rights come from the state, the state can take them away.

And your quote is of course George Washington. The greatest of all Americans even still today.

Your last sentence is correct, as was Washington.

 

[dogtowner]

Dog's got it -- it was JFK, speaking in 1962.

the best the dems have ever had

 

[Lagboltz]

The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system — and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes to be enacted and become effective in ......

(I hid the year at the end to not make it obvious)

I suppose the quote by Kennedy about reducing taxes is supposed to be ironic for a Democrat, but you have to remember that the top marginal tax rate was around 90% at that time. It is easy to believe that he was right.

However today the top marginal rate is the lowest it has been since the 1930's, so the wisdom of Kennedy's statement becomes more questionable in today's economy.

When tax rate reductions are discussed people often refer to the Laffer Curve --
1) If the tax rate were zero, the government would get no revenue from wages.
2) If the tax rate were 100%, nobody would overtly work and the government would still get no revenue.
3) Somewhere between those extremes the tax revenue curve would reach it's maximum.

The real problem is figuring out the tax rate that gives the maximum. It can only be guessed. Apparently those who want taxes reduced have one idea, and those who want it increased have another. Ordinarily I would ask what tax rate would be best for growing the economy, but since we are deeply in debt, the revenue becomes very important for reducing debt.

 

[dogtowner]

I suppose the quote by Kennedy about reducing taxes is supposed to be ironic for a Democrat, but you have to remember that the top marginal tax rate was around 90% at that time. It is easy to believe that he was right.

However today the top marginal rate is the lowest it has been since the 1930's, so the wisdom of Kennedy's statement becomes more questionable in today's economy.

When tax rate reductions are discussed people often refer to the Laffer Curve --
1) If the tax rate were zero, the government would get no revenue from wages.
2) If the tax rate were 100%, nobody would overtly work and the government would still get no revenue.
3) Somewhere between those extremes the tax revenue curve would reach it's maximum.

The real problem is figuring out the tax rate that gives the maximum. It can only be guessed. Apparently those who want taxes reduced have one idea, and those who want it increased have another. Ordinarily I would ask what tax rate would be best for growing the economy, but since we are deeply in debt, the revenue becomes very important for reducing debt.

you can also address debt ny spending less. as JFK understood, raising taxes is fruitless (note ghe loss on millionaire Uk is seeing). remember that virtually no one oays the stated rate given deductions, lawyers and cpas.
the effective rate of revenue stays relatively constant regardless of what the state rate is (roughly 18%of gdp) so is its revenue you want, grow the gdp.
this is the goal JFK had and it worked well.

 

[Lagboltz]

you can also address debt ny spending less. as JFK understood, raising taxes is fruitless (note ghe loss on millionaire Uk is seeing). remember that virtually no one oays the stated rate given deductions, lawyers and cpas.
the effective rate of revenue stays relatively constant regardless of what the state rate is (roughly 18%of gdp) so is its revenue you want, grow the gdp.
this is the goal JFK had and it worked well.

Yes, spend less too. I agree with you about the GDP. Even though the GDP-to-revenue ratio is relatively constant, note that in years of higher taxes the national debt dropped, and that was my focus. Growing the GDP is OK with me, but that is much more difficult to control in today's international doldrums.

 

[Cruella]

Yes, spend less too. I agree with you about the GDP. Even though the GDP-to-revenue ratio is relatively constant, note that in years of higher taxes the national debt dropped, and that was my focus. Growing the GDP is OK with me, but that is much more difficult to control in today's international doldrums.

It's not brain surgery. The Govt. spends 40% more than it takes in.

 

[Lagboltz]

It's not brain surgery. The Govt. spends 40% more than it takes in.

I'm not sure what you are getting at. "Brain surgery" is a metaphor for something difficult to do, and I would say that spending 40% less and reducing the debt will be very difficult. Metaphorically I think that is "brain surgery"