Reagan's Budget Director Opposes Extending Bush Tax Cuts

obama_total_approval_august_5_2010.jpg


Unprecedented
 
I think you meant precedented.

Analysis: Obama Remains More Popular than Reagan

One of the dirty little secrets about presidents and approval ratings is that more often than not the numbers are governed by pocketbook politics. Both Barack Obama and Ronald Reagan inherited recessions early in their terms, and interestingly, Obama is has a higher approval rating that Reagan at the same point during their first terms. Obama is actually stronger than Reagan was right now.

In order to keep the numbers consistent, all data comes from Gallup. First some broad overall statistics, Ronald Reagan’s overall approval rating averaged for both of his terms was 52.8%, while Obama’s average for his entire term is 55%. During Reagan’s first term, his approval rating average was 50.3%, in comparison to Obama’s 54%. As you can see, Obama is slightly ahead of Reagan at this point, but they are both in the same range.

Why Reagan and Obama make for a good comparison is that the case can be made that they both inherited bad economies when they came into office. The Reagan Recession lasted from July 1981-November 1982, while Obama has been dealing with a recession that he inherited since taking office in January 2009 through the present day.

In the case of Ronald Reagan, the recession ate away at his approval ratings, which were only boosted by a 68% sympathy approval rating after he was shot on March 30, 1981. For his first year in office, Reagan’s approval rating was 57%, but the recession took its toll in the second year and his approval rating dipped to 43% after his second year. He hit his all time low approval rating in January 1983 at 35%, and for his third year his approval rating was 45%. Reagan’s approval rating did not start to turn until late into his third year.

During the recession Reagan posted approval ratings of 42%, 41% and then September-December Reagan’s approval rating did not budge from the 41%-43% range. It got even worse for Reagan in 1983, as he opened 1983 at 35% and did not even reach 50% job approval until November of that year. The situation for Obama is similar. After one year in office Ronald Reagan’s approval rating was 47%, and Barack Obama’s was 49%. Obama’s yearly average in 2010 so far is 49%. Since November of 2009, Obama’s approval rating has ranged from 47%-51%. His lowest approval rating was 47% in April 2010.

The good news for Obama is that he is already in better shape than Reagan was at this point. The bad news is that if history is any indication, Democrats should be preparing to lose some seats in the midterm election this fall. Ronald Reagan’s Republicans lost a net 27 House seats to the Democrats in 1982, and the historical midterm average defeat for the president’s party in midterms is 28 House seats. Much like Reagan, once the economy improves in time for his reelection bid, you can expect Obama approval ratings to take off.

Current Republicans don’t like to bring this up, but recessions tend to make a president of either party very unpopular. It happened to Ronald Reagan, and it has happened to Barack Obama. The economy is simply a part of the cycle of politics. The GOP is out there selling the economy as the end of Obama, when the truth is that Obama, much like Reagan, will rebound to his previous popularity levels once the economy recovers. Obama is no more in trouble than Ronald Reagan was, but this is the part of the story that Republicans would rather not think about, because we all remember what happened to Walter Mondale in 1984. It is very possible that Sarah Palin or Mitt Romney will be set up to be the 21st Century Mondale.
Click to expand...

http://www.politicususa.com/en/reagan-obama-approval
 
The president is completely powerless and blameless in all things then. :laugh:

So I guess if Obama ever has a R congress that Republicans will blame their congress for everything that ever happens.
 
spike, our Consitution says the Congress pays the bills. I don't give a shit who writes the budget...it's Congress who holds the purse.
 
Gonz said:
spike, our Consitution says the Congress pays the bills. I don't give a shit who writes the budget...it's Congress who holds the purse.
Click to expand...

The person who writes the budget controls how money is spent. But it's good to hear you're not going to make one complaint about anything Obama decides to do with the budget.
 
Reagan's Budget Director ran off at the mouth

"The person who writes the budget controls how money is spent"

Well then who ever that motherfucker is
he should be shot!
 
OK... let me explain this scenario in as few and simple words as possible.

You have been given 50 cents by your mom to spend. You want to buy a candy bar (priced at 50 cents) at the corner store. You give your mom 25 cents. You now have 25 cents left to spend, but the candy bar is still 50 cents. You can purchase this 50 cent candy bar from the corner store by borrowing money from your brother, but you will have to submit to being his personal slave for a week, plus pay him back the 25 cents at the end of the week when your mom gives you another 50 cents to spend.

And before you jump up and yell "candy bars aren't good for you" or "you don't actually need the candy bar so don't buy it" the point I'm trying to make is:
1) you have been given money
2) you have something you want to buy
3) you give the money needed to buy the thing back
4) you don't have enough now to buy the thing and you must borrow under unpleasant circumstances
 
OK... let me explain this scenario in as few and simple words as possible.

You have been given 50 cents by your mom to spend. You want to buy a candy bar factory (priced at 5mil) so you can share candybars with everyone. You give your mom 25 cents. You now have 25 cents left to spend, but the candy bar factory is still 5mil. You can purchase this 5mil candy bar factory by printing money out on mom's computer and putting your brother and sisters grand children in debt and they will have to submit to being his personal slaves for a generation, plus pay back the 5mil as the one brother continues give the candy bars to others for free AND putting all the other local candy bar business out of business at the same time. End of the week comes when your mom gives you another 50 cents to spend and now you decide to buy a large dairy to give everyone free milk to go with the chocolate bars you give you them.
 
I don't want to get involved in all that high finance
I just want my free candy bars and milk
and I don’t care who’s enslaved to pay for them
I am entitled to my free shit!
 
Re: Reagan's Budget Director ran off at the mouth

Winky said:
"The person who writes the budget controls how money is spent"

Well then who ever that motherfucker is
he should be shot!
Click to expand...

You want to shoot Bush over the tax cut disaster?
 
Spike really isn't insane, honest!

The disaster that is waiting after January 1st 2011
is going to have serious unintended consequences.
You can bet yer ass on that one.
 
Re: massive tax increases during a depression

Winky said:
tastes great Less filing
28ri78g.jpg
Click to expand...

"We're not trying to antagonize Gov. Palin, but President Barack Obama has indeed published his proposals in some detail -- at least twice, in the annual budget documents that the White House releases.

The president's 2011 budget, for example, says on page 39, "Allow the Bush Tax Cuts for Households Earning More Than $250,000 to Expire."

"In the last Administration, those at the very top enjoyed large tax breaks and income gains while almost everyone else struggled and real income for the middle class declined. Our Nation cannot afford to continue these tax cuts, which is why the President supports allowing those tax cuts that affect families earning more than $250,000 a year to expire and committing these resources to reducing the deficit instead. This step will have no effect on the 98 percent of all households who make less than $250,000."

Lest you think that's too general and vague, there are detailed estimates in the budget summary tables, starting on page 164, for provisions such as, "Upper-income tax provisions devoted to deficit reduction: Expand the 28-percent rate and reinstate the 36-percent and 39.6-percent rates for those taxpayers with income over $250,000 (married) and $200,000 (single) ... Reinstate the personal exemption phaseout and limitation on itemized deductions for those taxpayers with income over $250,000 (married) and $200,000 (single) ... Impose 20-percent tax rate on capital gains and dividends for those taxpayers with income over $250,000 (married) and $200,000 (single)."

In Congress, key Democratic leaders have indicated they are using the plan outlined in the federal budget as the framework for their legislation. The Senate Finance Committee held a hearing on dealing with the expiring tax cuts. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the committee's chair, said in a July 14, 2010, statement, "I support extending the middle-class tax cuts permanently, as soon as possible, so working families can keep more of their hard-earned money."

The committee released a budget analysis from the Joint Committee on Taxation, "Estimated Effects on Economic Growth and Distribution." That document showed estimates for the cost to make the Bush tax cuts permanent for those who are now taxed at rates of 10 percent, 25 percent, 28 percent, "and part of the 33%." That 33 percent tax bracket, by the way, includes taxpayers who make slightly below and slightly above the benchmarks Obama described.

And then there's also the U.S. Treasury Department's "General Explanations of the Administration's Fiscal Year 2011 Revenue Proposals," known by policy wonks as "the green book." It outlines in even more detail how the Obama administration plans to increase taxes for high-earners and keep the current rates for everyone else."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...palin-said-democrats-have-no-plan-extend-som/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top