HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Ronald Reagan raised taxe...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 06:56 PM

Ronald Reagan raised taxes REPEATEDLY

of course, he wasn't dealing with the foaming-at-the-mouth John Birch gets a teabagging current Republican Party, either.

Reagan's Liberal Legacy (Washington Monthly)
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0301.green.html

Reagan began his first term with a major tax cut on marginal rates and also began funneling tax dollars to the defense. His first budget intended to cut 41.4 million from federal programs... a first round.

But after his initial victories on tax cuts and defense, the revolution effectively stalled. Deficits started to balloon, the recession soon deepened, his party lost ground in the 1982 midterms, and thereafter Reagan never seriously tried to enact the radical domestic agenda he'd campaigned on. Rather than abolish the departments of Energy and Education, as he had promised to do if elected president, Reagan added a new cabinet-level department--one of the largest federal agencies--the Department of Veterans Affairs.

As Lou Cannon, the Washington Post reporter who covered Reagan's political career for 25 years, put it in his masterful biography, President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime, "For all the fervor they created, the first-term Reagan budgets were mild manifestos devoid of revolutionary purpose. They did not seek to 'rebuild the foundation of our society' (the task Reagan set for himself and Congress in a nationally televised speech of February 5, 1981) or even to accomplish the 'sharp reduction in the spending growth trend' called for in Economic Recovery Plan." By Reagan's second term, the idea of seriously diminishing the budget was, to quote Stockman, "an institutionalized fantasy." Though in speeches Reagan continued to repeat his bold pledge to "get government out of the way of the people," government stayed pretty much where it was.


Reagan EXPANDED social security. And to pay for it RONALD REAGAN TAXED only THE RICH via payroll taxes.

One year after his massive tax cut, Reagan agreed to a tax increase to reduce the deficit that restored fully one-third of the previous year's reduction. (In a bizarre bit of self-deception, Reagan, who never came to terms with this episode of ideological apostasy, persuaded himself that the three-year, $100 billion tax hike--the largest since World War II--was actually "tax reform" that closed loopholes in his earlier cut and therefore didn't count as raising taxes.)

Faced with looming deficits, Reagan raised taxes again in 1983 with a gasoline tax and once more in 1984, this time by $50 billion over three years, mainly through closing tax loopholes for business. Despite the fact that such increases were anathema to conservatives--and probably cost Reagan's successor, George H.W. Bush, reelection--Reagan raised taxes a grand total of four times just between 1982-84.


From: 10 Things Conservatives Don't Want You to Know About Reagan
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/02/05/142288/reagan-centennial/

1. Reagan was a serial tax raiser. As governor of California, Reagan “signed into law the largest tax increase in the history of any state up till then.” Meanwhile, state spending nearly doubled. As president, Reagan “raised taxes in seven of his eight years in office,” including four times in just two years. As former GOP Senator Alan Simpson, who called Reagan “a dear friend,” told NPR, “Ronald Reagan raised taxes 11 times in his administration — I was there.” “Reagan was never afraid to raise taxes,” said historian Douglas Brinkley, who edited Reagan’s memoir. Reagan the anti-tax zealot is “false mythology,” Brinkley said.

2. Reagan nearly tripled the federal budget deficit. During the Reagan years, the debt increased to nearly $3 trillion, “roughly three times as much as the first 80 years of the century had done altogether.” Reagan enacted a major tax cut his first year in office and government revenue dropped off precipitously. Despite the conservative myth that tax cuts somehow increase revenue, the government went deeper into debt and Reagan had to raise taxes just a year after he enacted his tax cut. Despite ten more tax hikes on everything from gasoline to corporate income, Reagan was never able to get the deficit under control.

3. Unemployment soared after Reagan’s 1981 tax cuts. Unemployment jumped to 10.8 percent after Reagan enacted his much-touted tax cut, and it took years for the rate to get back down to its previous level. Meanwhile, income inequality exploded. Despite the myth that Reagan presided over an era of unmatched economic boom for all Americans, Reagan disproportionately taxed the poor and middle class, but the economic growth of the 1980′s did little help them. “Since 1980, median household income has risen only 30 percent, adjusted for inflation, while average incomes at the top have tripled or quadrupled,” the New York Times’ David Leonhardt noted.

4. Reagan grew the size of the federal government tremendously. Reagan promised “to move boldly, decisively, and quickly to control the runaway growth of federal spending,” but federal spending “ballooned” under Reagan. He bailed out Social Security in 1983 after attempting to privatize it, and set up a progressive taxation system to keep it funded into the future. He promised to cut government agencies like the Department of Energy and Education but ended up adding one of the largest — the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, which today has a budget of nearly $90 billion and close to 300,000 employees. He also hiked defense spending by over $100 billion a year to a level not seen since the height of the Vietnam war.


Don't believe the bullshit mythology about Reagan, even tho he continued with sustain his delusions to the grave, most likely.

14 replies, 1476 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to RainDog (Original post)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 07:03 PM

1. Shit! I didn't even know the president could raise taxes...

I had always thought that was done in congress, specifically the House of Representatives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hughee99 (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 07:07 PM

2. he signed off on the tax hikes

and, as the leader of his party, made sure he got what he wanted.

But you knew that, didn't you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hughee99 (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 07:28 PM

3. what? no more snappy repartee?

Executive branch proposes, legislative makes it happen... or doesn't.

Executive signs off on tax bills...

Executive provides framework for his or her party as the leader and the legislature follows that lead...

did I miss something?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RainDog (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 08:07 PM

4. He started taxing SS income and also unemployment compensation. I believe the first

$100 or $200 of interest income and dividend income was tax free until Reagan eliminated that deduction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RainDog (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 08:49 PM

8. Thought you'd see some mention of the deals he made on those hikes...

or was Tip O'Neil just grabbing his ankles for whatever Raygun wanted. Executives provide a framework for THEIR party, which didn't control the house in any of Raygun's eight years. Raygun had to compromise and much like Obama has to do today, and as a result, signs legislation his own party will regret in retrospect.

I don't know, maybe I'm just still upset about Obama's tax cuts for the rich in 2010.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hughee99 (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 09:00 PM

9. Lay it out

If you've got it, document it.

The reality is the Republican Party got told a great big no thank you at the ballot box after Reagan's tax cutting agenda started and HE NEVER AGAIN PROPOSED ANYTHING OF THE SORT BECAUSE THE INITIAL ACTIONS WERE SUCH MASSIVE FAILURES.

which has been documented repeatedly.

Don't be shy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RainDog (Reply #9)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 11:58 PM

12. Lay it out? The president doesn't cut or create taxes.

Last edited Sat Dec 29, 2012, 01:51 AM - Edit history (2)

You know it, I know it. At best, he can sign or reject something that's been through congress. Raygun wanted massive increases in defense spending. The Democrats (to their credit) demanded he pay for at least some of it. Raygun wanted the defense spending more than he cared about the taxes and made a deal (one which resulted in huge debt). To say that Raygun wanted, or asked for the tax increases isn't accurate. He took them in order to get what he really wanted which was gobs of money for the Military Industrial complex. Lets not start making Raygun seem like a reasonable guy who truly understood that there may be a need for tax increases, he wasn't. He made deals to get what he wanted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RainDog (Original post)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 08:09 PM

5. Today's GOP would not nominate the real Reagan

Too liberal!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RainDog (Original post)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 08:14 PM

6. How do you get scum like Reagan to be seen as reasonable?

 

Elect people far worse.

It's sickening and disgusting that we have to point to this horrible President as an example of what the good old days were like or what normalcy is like.

Reagan was NOT a good guy. He was NOT a good President. His puppet administration DESTROYED the country and are responsible for where we are now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrSlayer (Reply #6)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 08:33 PM

7. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrSlayer (Reply #6)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 09:10 PM

10. I think Ronald Reagan was a scum sucking shit for brains

And, with Junior, one of the worst presidents of this century.

He doesn't sound reasonable at all, to me. He's another example of what lying no good pieces of shit Republicans are in regard to the American people.

They seem to play to white male insecurity with their dumbass macho posturing - most of all from the two, oh, make that three assholes who were the most gung-ho for war and secret wars and torture - and that would be Reagan, Junior and Cheney the Dick.

Anyone who thinks Reagan was anything other than a sack of shit is as gullible as a three-year-old, to me.

He cozied up to fascists in Central and South America, performed an act of treason to get elected - trading arms for hostages with Iran - which- for those of you who were not alive at the time - was sickeningly funny at the time. Iran released them immediately after Reagan took the oath of office - it was really OBVIOUS to anyone - even me, at the time - that a deal had gone down - and Iran wanted the U.S. to know it.

But too many Americans are so fucking stupid that they thought Iran was scared of Ronnie Raygun.

He takes credit for bringing down the Berlin Wall b/c of his role as an actor playing a senile president. Oh wait, that was no act.

If anyone really wants to know what happened they should read The Year That Changed The World.

While Ronnie was posturing, real people in Hungary and other east bloc nations were creating the situations that would lead to change. The Reagan administration had no idea that this was going on b/c of their blinders about the Soviet bloc.

So, if anyone thinks this post is glorifying Reagan - it's not.

I'm saying he's been a scum sucking liar since before he took office and he died without telling the truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RainDog (Reply #10)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 01:58 AM

13. I'm not saying you personally.

 

But in general I see a lot of people bringing up Reagan and Nixon as people who "weren't that bad" or even looked on with nostalgia. That's how bad things are, that's how far right the Democrats have gone. That's how utterly dysfunctional, bought off and idiotic Washington has become.

I'm sickened by this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RainDog (Original post)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 09:16 PM

11. the teaparty lives in a world of it's own, unrelated to reality.

taxes are how their fucking salaries are paid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RainDog (Original post)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 08:42 AM

14. "Don't believe the bullshit mythology about Reagan"

Since we're mythbusting:

<...>

Q3. Which political party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A3. The taxation of Social Security began in 1984 following passage of a set of Amendments in 1983, which were signed into law by President Reagan in April 1983. These amendments passed the Congress in 1983 on an overwhelmingly bi-partisan vote.

The basic rule put in place was that up to 50% of Social Security benefits could be added to taxable income, if the taxpayer's total income exceeded certain thresholds.

The taxation of benefits was a proposal which came from the Greenspan Commission appointed by President Reagan and chaired by Alan Greenspan (who went on to later become the Chairman of the Federal Reserve).

The full text of the Greenspan Commission report is available on our website.

President's Reagan's signing statement for the 1983 Amendments can also be found on our website.

A detailed explanation of the provisions of the 1983 law is also available on the website.



Q4. Which political party increased the taxes on Social Security annuities?

A4. In 1993, legislation was enacted which had the effect of increasing the tax put in place under the 1983 law. It raised from 50% to 85% the portion of Social Security benefits subject to taxation; but the increased percentage only applied to "higher income" beneficiaries. Beneficiaries of modest incomes might still be subject to the 50% rate, or to no taxation at all, depending on their overall taxable income.

This change in the tax rate was one provision in a massive Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) passed that year. The OBRA 1993 legislation was deadlocked in the Senate on a tie vote of 50-50 and Vice President Al Gore cast the deciding vote in favor of passage. President Clinton signed the bill into law on August 10, 1993.

(You can find a brief historical summary of the development of taxation of Social Security benefits on the Social Security website.)

http://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html



<...>

TAX TREATMENT

Taxation of Social Security and Railroad Retirement Tier 1 Benefits

Beginning in 1984, includes in taxable income up to one-half of Social Security (and railroad retirement tier 1) benefits received by taxpayers whose incomes exceed certain base amounts. The base amounts are $25,000 for a single taxpayer, $32,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly and zero for married taxpayers filing separately. Income for purposes of figuring these base amounts includes adjusted gross income under prior law, plus nontaxable interest income, and one-half of Social Security and railroad retirement tier 1 benefits. The amount of benefits that could be included in taxable income will be the lesser of one-half of benefits or one-half of the excess of the taxpayers' combined income (AGI + one-half of benefits) over the base amount. The provision for including nontaxable interest income is intended to provide similar tax treatment of benefits received by individuals whose total incomes consist of different mixes of taxable and nontaxable income and to limit opportunities for manipulation of tax liability on benefits.

Includes in the definition of Social Security benefits for tax purposes workmen's compensation benefits to the extent they cause a reduction in Social Security and railroad retirement tier 1 disability benefits. This provision is intended to assure that these social insurance benefits, which are paid in lieu of Social Security payments, are treated similarly for purposes of taxation.

The provision applies to nonresident aliens as well as U.S. citizens. Under the Internal Revenue Code, nonresident aliens who have income from sources other than a U.S. trade or business are taxed at a flat rate of 30 percent, unless a tax treaty provides otherwise, and the taxes must be withheld at the source of payment. Thus, 30 percent of 1/2 of the Social Security benefit (15 percent of the total benefit) will be withheld from nonresident alien beneficiaries.

Provides special rules for dealing with overpayments and lump-sum retroactive benefit payments. Benefits paid to an individual in any taxable year will be reduced by any overpayments repaid during the year. Taxpayers who receive a lump-sum payment of retroactive benefits may treat the benefits as wholly payable for the year in which they receive them or may elect to attribute the benefits to the tax years in which they would have fallen had they been paid timely. No benefits for months before December 1983 would be taxable, regardless of when they are paid.

Requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Railroad Retirement Board to file annual returns with the Secretary of the Treasury setting forth the amounts of benefits paid to each individual in each calendar year, together with the name and address of the individual. Also requires furnishing of similar information to each beneficiary.

Requires that amounts equivalent to estimated quarterly proceeds from the taxation of benefits be automatically deposited in the Social Security trust funds and the railroad retirement account, as appropriate, at the beginning of each calendar quarter, subject to final adjustments based on estimates by the Secretary of the Treasury. Requires an annual report by the Secretary of the Treasury concerning the transfers under this provision.

The provision is estimated to affect about 10 percent of Social Security beneficiaries in 1984. Amounts equal to the estimated tax revenues under this provision will be automatically deposited to the OASDI trust funds. The provision increases trust fund revenues by $26.7 billion for 1983-1989 and by .62 percent of taxable payroll in the long range.

http://www.ssa.gov/history/1983amend2.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread