• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you agree with this political meme?

Do you agree with this political meme?


  • Total voters
    13
No I don't think I did, "its not the 60's anymore" is rather cut and dry, as is "so?"

Harshaw said:
I have zero problem with any of this so long as we return to the scope of government which existed when he was President. Which means everything the government does now, which it didn't do in 1960, gets chucked.

and i simply pointed out that IT'S NOT THE 60's ANYMORE. He want the government of the 60s to return as all cave people do.


glad i could clear that up for ya.
 
Harshaw said:

and i simply pointed out that IT'S NOT THE 60's ANYMORE. He want the government of the 60s to return as all cave people do.

glad i could clear that up for ya.

Clear what up? You've not told me anything I didn't already understand, in fact this suggestion that we would be returned to cave people was addressed in my previous post:

"You can roll back spending without rolling back civil rights, women's rights, gay rights, technology, workplace safety regulation or any knowledge gained since."

What you're making is a fallacious argument, no one suggested or is it necessary to return to the 60's moral zeitgeist (which wasn't quite cave people btw, give them some credit.)
 
Moreover when comparing tax rates on the wealthiest (and everyone else), this needs to be done through the lens of the time and conditions of that time. The effective rate wasn't anywhere near 91% or whatever lame number the left parades around.

Here were the effective individual income tax rates of the 3 very high income AGI groups.

$200,000-$500,000 group: Tax as Share of Amended AGI (%)

1953 = 45.9
1954 = 39.3
1955 = 36.8
1956 = 37.4
1957 = 38.6
1958 = 36.9
1959 = 33.8
1960 = 33.1
1961 = 31.5

$500,000-$1,000,000 group: Tax as Share of Amended AGI (%)

1953 = 46.3
1954 = 38.7
1955 = 35.6
1956 = 36.7
1957 = 36.6
1958 = 36.0
1959 = 32.1
1960 = 30.8
1961 = 29.1

Over $1,000,000 group: Tax as Share of Amended AGI (%)

1953 = 49.3
1954 = 38.8
1955 = 35.8
1956 = 36.1
1957 = 40.0
1958 = 33.1
1959 = 30.6
1960 = 31.3
1961 = 27.2

SOURCE: William Williams, The Changing Progressivity of the Federal Income Tax, National Tax Journal (1964)

Source

One can easily see that the effective rate on the higher brackets lowered over the course of Ike's terms.
 
Fun Fact: The US interstate highway system was inspired by and based off of the Nazi autobahn.

I think it goes back to the Romans Roads system. Of course, that does not disprove Eisenhower's inspiration being the Nazis but might suggest a Nazi autobahn root.

Roman roads - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

PS. Our modern commercial airline system is also built upon highway type model, albeit invisible. With the airline industry, commercial airliners follow predefined paths in the sky to get from city to city including the requirement to fly at specific altitudes. The Roman Roads system were one of many unique characteristics of the Roman Empire that continue in some form to this day.
 
Harshaw said:


and i simply pointed out that IT'S NOT THE 60's ANYMORE. He want the government of the 60s to return as all cave people do.


glad i could clear that up for ya.

You didn't "clear" anything up. My point sailed about 50 feet above your head.

You cannot compare what anyone does today with what Eisenhower did in the '50s, because all of the circumstances are entirely, utterly different.

Of course, it often helps if you WANT to understand a point, and I don't think you really do here.
 
What you're making is a fallacious argument, no one suggested or is it necessary to return to the 60's moral zeitgeist (which wasn't quite cave people btw, give them some credit.)

Actually, I've seen quite a few DP liberals cite the '50s as a panacea (that evil conservatives pulled us away from, natch).
 
You didn't "clear" anything up. My point sailed about 50 feet above your head.

You cannot compare what anyone does today with what Eisenhower did in the '50s, because all of the circumstances are entirely, utterly different.

Of course, it often helps if you WANT to understand a point, and I don't think you really do here.

thank you for your clarification. When i read your post the first 2 times, i read the exact opposite.

all clear now.
 
thank you for your clarification. When i read your post the first 2 times, i read the exact opposite.

all clear now.

This was my response to you the FIRST time, post #7:

It's not the '50s anymore. Thus, comparing what anyone does now to what Eisenhower did THEN is specious at best.
 
The way the stimulus is being used in my city to repair our crumbling infrastructure is that they're putting big tin green fish, with holes in them, along the freeways. They also have some tin birds and on some freeway islands they've constructed big tin elk and other strange animals. They're also painting the concrete a light brown color and installing no-jump metal panels on one side only of raised walkways. Murals are probably on the way.

Link?
 
The way the stimulus is being used in my city to repair our crumbling infrastructure is that they're putting big tin green fish, with holes in them, along the freeways. They also have some tin birds and on some freeway islands they've constructed big tin elk and other strange animals. They're also painting the concrete a light brown color and installing no-jump metal panels on one side only of raised walkways. Murals are probably on the way.

Sounds like a solid use of funds. :lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom