AIG exit plan to slash U.S. bailout costs-official

Councilman · Oct 2, 2010

One last post on this thread in answer to the BOGUS revisionist claims that Reagan caused some kind of economic problems here are some facts you can either digest or choke on.

And think about the Leader of the Trifecta Of Doom, Obama's plans to tax hell out of us. Then get a grip and and help save us from the coming disaster and vote the bums out in Nov.

Fact: Interest rates eased after Reagan slashed tax rates.

The long-bond yield was 13.45 percent in 1981. By the time Reagan left office in 1989, it had dropped to 8.45 percent. Mortgage rates fell from 14.70 percent to 10.13 percent over the same period.

Fact: Inflation cooled.

In the year before Reagan's tax cuts took effect, the annual rate of consumer inflation was 13.5 percent. In the first year of his tax cut, 1981, inflation was 10.3 percent. In the second year, it was 6.2 percent. By the third and final year, 1983, inflation had dropped to 3.2 percent. When Reagan left office, inflation stood at a tame 4.8 percent.

Fact: The economy reached full employment.

Before Reagan's full tax-relief package took effect, the jobless rate hit 9.6 percent. But as tax cuts worked their magic in the economy, unemployment dropped every year after 1983, reaching a low of 5.3 percent in 1989.

Tax cuts benefited minorities, too. The jobless rate among blacks plunged from 19.5 percent in 1983 to 11.4 percent in 1989.

Fact: Government revenues nearly doubled after Reagan's sweeping tax cuts.

Before his 25 percent across-the-board cut in individual income-tax rates went into effect, government receipts from individual income taxes trickled in at $244.1 billion. The year Reagan left office, they totaled $445.7 billion -- an 82 percent jump.

In the tax-hiking, supposedly "fiscally responsible" '90s, by comparison, individual tax receipts rose a comparable 86 percent.

More key, individual tax receipts grew at a compound annual rate of 6.9 percent from 1980 to 1989 (compared with a 7.1 percent rate from 1990 to 1999).

Councilman out.

Lord Tammerlain · Oct 2, 2010

Councilman said:
One last post on this thread in answer to the BOGUS revisionist claims that Reagan caused some kind of economic problems here are some facts you can either digest or choke on.

And think about the Leader of the Trifecta Of Doom, Obama's plans to tax hell out of us. Then get a grip and and help save us from the coming disaster and vote the bums out in Nov.

Fact: Interest rates eased after Reagan slashed tax rates.

Which he then promptly increased by increasing Social Security taxes

The long-bond yield was 13.45 percent in 1981. By the time Reagan left office in 1989, it had dropped to 8.45 percent. Mortgage rates fell from 14.70 percent to 10.13 percent over the same period.

Fact: Inflation cooled.

Not due to anything Reagan did, Paul Vocker raised the fed funds rate, caused a very large recession to get rid of inflation

In the year before Reagan's tax cuts took effect, the annual rate of consumer inflation was 13.5 percent. In the first year of his tax cut, 1981, inflation was 10.3 percent. In the second year, it was 6.2 percent. By the third and final year, 1983, inflation had dropped to 3.2 percent. When Reagan left office, inflation stood at a tame 4.8 percent.

again not due to anything Reagan did

Fact: The economy reached full employment.

Before Reagan's full tax-relief package took effect, the jobless rate hit 9.6 percent. But as tax cuts worked their magic in the economy, unemployment dropped every year after 1983, reaching a low of 5.3 percent in 1989.

The tax cuts caused large government deficits, which caused US federal government debt as a % of GDP to increase by over 20% during the Reagan admin. It was the deficit spending that provided the majority of the growth during the Reagan admin, remove that spending and economic growth would have been minimal

Tax cuts benefited minorities, too. The jobless rate among blacks plunged from 19.5 percent in 1983 to 11.4 percent in 1989.

Not tax cuts, government stimulus

Fact: Government revenues nearly doubled after Reagan's sweeping tax cuts.

Yet government debt as % of GDP increased even faster

Before his 25 percent across-the-board cut in individual income-tax rates went into effect, government receipts from individual income taxes trickled in at $244.1 billion. The year Reagan left office, they totaled $445.7 billion -- an 82 percent jump.

In the tax-hiking, supposedly "fiscally responsible" '90s, by comparison, individual tax receipts rose a comparable 86 percent.

More key, individual tax receipts grew at a compound annual rate of 6.9 percent from 1980 to 1989 (compared with a 7.1 percent rate from 1990 to 1999).

Councilman out.

The Reagan admin was not fiscally responsible, not by a long shot, it increased government debt as % of GDP not seen in the US since WW2. Nearly every admin from WW2 to the Reagan admin either lowered or generally maintained % debt to GDP (possible exception being Nixon. Carters record on that record is by far better then Reagan.

The Prof · Oct 2, 2010

this thread isn't about bush and reagan

why do you want to derail it?

The Prof · Oct 2, 2010

USA-1 said:
Bernanke and the top economic minds in the country said we would have gone into a depression worse than the Great One without the spending.

well, it's not as if the chairmen and his clubby chums operate in a political vacuum

The Prof · Oct 2, 2010

Objective Voice said:
I'll give you the stimulus spending was all Obama, but since most economist say not even half of it has been spent yet (and even some Republicans are still arguing why all of the money hasn't been allocated to date), it just stands to reason that alot of the information about Obama spending (some, of which, hasn't even started yet, ie., appropriates yet to be acquired for health care reform legislation beyond what was authorized to start state high-risk pools), all this talk of spending under Obama is misleading at best.

per the pollyannish report issued by the veep's office yesterday: 70% of recovery act money (we're not allowed to use the s-word) has been spent, 551B, creating or saving or accounting for with a ridiculous lack of credibility 1.5M jobs, at a cost of almost 400K per

it was in the news

washingtonpost.com

The Prof · Oct 2, 2010

regarding aig, don't forget:

Dodd vs. Treasury: Who Is Responsible for AIG Loophole? - ABC News

Geithner's New York Fed Pushed AIG To Keep Sweetheart Deals Secret (READ THE AIG EMAILS)

Grant · Oct 2, 2010

Lord Tammerlain said:
Which he then promptly increased by increasing Social Security taxes Not due to anything Reagan did, Paul Vocker raised the fed funds rate, caused a very large recession to get rid of inflation again not due to anything Reagan did The tax cuts caused large government deficits, which caused US federal government debt as a % of GDP to increase by over 20% during the Reagan admin. It was the deficit spending that provided the majority of the growth during the Reagan admin, remove that spending and economic growth would have been minimal
Not tax cuts, government stimulus Yet government debt as % of GDP increased even faster

The Reagan admin was not fiscally responsible, not by a long shot, it increased government debt as % of GDP not seen in the US since WW2. Nearly every admin from WW2 to the Reagan admin either lowered or generally maintained % debt to GDP (possible exception being Nixon. Carters record on that record is by far better then Reagan.

Click to expand...

Why do foreigners always insist they know more about American politics than Americans??

If an American was to do the same it would certainly smack of 'Arrogance", a charge leftist Europeans are often making against Americans.

I know Leftists everywhere tend to be a little dim but it seems Eurolefties always try to go that extra mile.

Click to expand...

The Prof · Oct 2, 2010

Councilman said:
What is really funny is you don't know what the hell your talking about even a little bit.

First I wasn't even signed onto this site until 04-25-09 so at least try to get a grip on reality and a few the facts that always seem to go the way of the Great Auk when ever one of your ilk goes on the attack an choose to use minor points that have nothing to do with the topic at hand, and then add made conclusions in another failed attempt to appear clever.

FYI I am a retired Reporter, Radio Talk Show Host, and politician and was very busy until I retired going after Bush's wasteful spending on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq comparing the money spent with the costs of WW-II is today's dollars and it is frightening to see that we spent more in a few years in two small countries than we spent in four years fighting around the world.

I also apposed many of his other actions on a regular basis. You see Pal I am a Conservative not a republican and I am all about what is for what is good for our Nation in general and "WE THE PEOPLE" specifically.

Bush did run up the debt and it was wrong and the prosecution of wars justified or not, the cost was way (BEEPING) more than it should have because the Military farms out too many of the functions they used to handle in house like transportation of supplies and the meals being prepared by by contractors at exorbitant costs.

Companies like Backwater soaked us all.

Obama has now Nearly doubled the Bush debt in two years to over13 trillion dollars and it's climbing too fast to read.
Just try to read it/
Defeat The Debt

what's truly pathetic, by my view, is anyone who would attempt to make YOU the topic of this discussion

that said, you speak for yourself very ably

you're actually interesting, unlike most the personality prone posters around here

Lord Tammerlain · Oct 2, 2010

Grant said:
Lord Tammerlain said:

Which he then promptly increased by increasing Social Security taxes Not due to anything Reagan did, Paul Vocker raised the fed funds rate, caused a very large recession to get rid of inflation again not due to anything Reagan did The tax cuts caused large government deficits, which caused US federal government debt as a % of GDP to increase by over 20% during the Reagan admin. It was the deficit spending that provided the majority of the growth during the Reagan admin, remove that spending and economic growth would have been minimal
Not tax cuts, government stimulus Yet government debt as % of GDP increased even faster

Why do foreigners always insist they know more about American politics than Americans??

If an American was to do the same it would certainly smack of 'Arrogance", a charge leftist Europeans are often making against Americans.

I know Leftists everywhere tend to be a little dim but it seems Eurolefties always try to go that extra mile.

Click to expand...

I am not a euro lefty

And is anything I stated wrong, and can you prove it with facts if I am?

Click to expand...

USA_1 · Oct 2, 2010

Councilman said:
One last post on this thread in answer to the BOGUS revisionist claims that Reagan caused some kind of economic problems here are some facts you can either digest or choke on.
t.

Reagan caused a huge economic problem. Of course you revisionists always selectively forget about the savings and loan collapse that cost the taxpayers 170 billion dollars. Some of you seem to live in your own little world, ignoring reality.

Boo Radley · Oct 4, 2010

Councilman said:
Why is it Liberals and those claiming to Others are so quick to try to put works in others mouths.

You have no earthly idea what anyone was doing or saying bout what happened back in the 80s and besides it is not a part of the facts in question today.

It is so childish, it's like when 10 year old Jimmy gets caught stealing cherries off a tree and when he's confronted he says: 'Well oh yeah! Billy stole some Cookies."

Obviously one thing has not one damn thing to do with the other. This comes under WT* Over.

What would have happened had the Trifecta of Doom, Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the dumb ass Congress had not continued the mistake of the Bailouts, we would be where we are headed, no. Down the toilet because spending money you don't have on plans that don't work, while pushing for massive Tax Increases from the phony Health plan, and over Cap and Trade, that will further kill the job Market and either continue the rescission or push us into the planned result of Obama following the Cloward & Pevin Strategy.

No, I do actually know what people I talked to said. You go on any number of boards and find republicans arguuing that deficit spending don't matter. Many argued in support of Bush's spending.

And if you were alive during the 80's, and paid attention, many argued the same with Reagan. So, no mind reading was required.

Objective Voice · Oct 5, 2010

The Prof said:
per the pollyannish report issued by the veep's office yesterday: 70% of recovery act money (we're not allowed to use the s-word) has been spent, 551B, creating or saving or accounting for with a ridiculous lack of credibility 1.5M jobs, at a cost of almost 400K per

it was in the news

washingtonpost.com

I can't speak to the effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) of the ARRA. For now, I'd say the verdict is still out since the only "equity" the States or the People will see out of it is "sweat equity", i.e., rebuilding bridges, repairing or laying new roadways, building mass transit systems or laying new routes (i.e., high-speed rail), etc., etc.

Until the States start taking private-public projects more seriously instead of using most of the ARRA money to prop up their own budgets (much like the banks and AIG did), improvements in our nation's infrastructure will continue to be put on hold.