Proud Support for Glenn Melancon for Congress
Maybe you haven't spent the past ten+ years being represented by nincompoops who sell their votes to the highest bidder, and don't do public interest anything. But if you have, you may share my pride in coming across an item in History News Network that shows the candidate I am backing against the incumbent having a fine and terribly principled discussion about the economic stance of the liberal vs. that of the antipoor. I am going to let you enjoy it without my trying to set the stage, even.
Here it is:
"......Histrionically, those with property and large incomes were not taxed. In fact governments went to great lengths to avoid upsetting the wealthy by using excise and poll taxes. These regressive taxes allowed the wealthy to keep much of what they earned and pass it on to their offsprings. According to Mr. Heuisler hypothesis, the pre-twentieth century world should have been one of general prosperity. We all know that this was not the case. It was a world in which a tiny elite enjoyed a life of relative material well-being, while the masses lead of life struggling to reach subsistence. The progressive income tax, the New Deal and the Welfare State provided for a more equitable distribution of wealth by shifting the tax burden to those who could best afford to pay. This “Robinhood” approach, to use the confiscation metaphor, not only helped those at the bottom of the scale by promoted the “Wealth of the Nation.” Who could argue that the “rich” have been hurt by the last fifty years of Liberal Economics? As Keynes pointed out, the jobless make poor consumers. Through programs like Social Security, Medicare, Food Stamps, Housing Assistance and other government programs the poor become consumers. Where do they spend this new found “wealth”? In the very businesses that decry high taxes. It is in everyone’s interest to keep the progressive tax structure. The supply-side model may put more money in the hands of investors, but they will simply hoard their wealth like the feudal lords of old if there are no consumers to buy the supply.
[ Reply ] [ Return to Comments ]
Glenn's histrionics (#8156)
by Bill Heuisler on February 10, 2003 at 9:08 PM
Mr. Melancon has evidently learned his history at Boston U. under the grim tutelage of Howard Zinn. Some of his lines are near quotes from one or another Zinn polemic. Others are...
His second sentence: "Histrionically, those with property and large incomes were not taxed."
He might have something. Does Boston U. have a theater group?
Bill Heuisler
[ Reply ] [ Return to Comments ]
He DOES Have Something: Truth! (#8165)
by Tom Kellum on February 10, 2003 at 11:21 PM
Mr. Melancon DOES have something. Something that Mr. Heuisler was not able to refute. Something that so rattled Mr. Heuisler that all he could in response is engage in two ad hominen attacks: one on the great Howard Zinn, and one on Mr. Melancon.
It is odd that there are still some people in this country who pine for the economic mess that Reagan put us in. Debt farther than the eyes can see. Now, President HappyCrack is repeating the Reagan model. Yessir, transfer all of that money to the rich (don't forget the Carlyle Group), and then there won't be any left to give to those left-wing state universities who pay professors to indocrinate students with an idealized fantasy of what the first 150+ years of our nation's history was like for everyone except the families of rich, white, property-owning males.
No thanks, Mr. Heuisler. That may be what you want to go back to, and "President" Bush is doing his best to get you there; but I'm not interested.
[ Reply ] [ Return to Comments ]
RE: Glenn's histrionics (#8166)
by Glenn Melancon on February 10, 2003 at 11:23 PM
Your rebuttal is an ad hominen attack?
Surely you do not wish to argue that America was a better place before Liberalism–no food regulations, no work place safety regulations, no environmental protection, no women’s suffrage, no civil rights for African Americans, no unemployment benefits, no Social Security? Which of these progressive programs would you repeal? Or maybe you would like to cut the size of the military during war time?
I will admit that Soviet style central planning was a complete failure, if you admit that the mixed US economy was a roaring success. No Liberal wants to institute the policies of Joseph Stalin. We simply want a system that creates opportunity. FDR laid a foundation on which Americans can be proud. Rejecting Fascism and Communism at a time of despair, the Americans of the 1930 created the opportunities that many enjoy today. Goldwater and Reagan (and now George II) wanted to destroy that legacy. To return to the policies of the nineteenth century would be an utter failure.
[ Reply ] [ Return to Comments ]
RE: Glenn's histrionics (#8176)
by Bill Heuisler on February 11, 2003 at 12:56 AM
Mr. Melancon,
You brought up histrionics - a refreshing change-of-pace.
And it was big of you to admit the failure of Soviet Communism ten years after it imploded. Government planning doesn't work.
As to your pseudo-history, no one mentioned Liberalism but you. Government does not create opportunity, individuals do. The 1964 Civil Rights Act passed with a majority of Republican votes and only a minority of Democrats, women's sufferage passed while Republicans were in control and only months before Warren Harding was inaugurated. The rest of your list was put into place with the aid of Congresses and Presidents of both parties.
Now let's focus on the HNN comment about Americans being suspicious of W's tax cuts. You seem fixated on how terrible the United States has become under Reagan and the Bushes and how wonderful Socialism would be. You've apparently read Howard Zinn and therefore hate this country and our free-market system as it has evolved. That's fine, but has nothing to do with the article.
The article in question opposes President Bush's tax cuts and proposes taxing each American "transaction" from paycheck to death. Do you favor more taxation? Income? Sales? How much more?
My position is that we need the tax cuts - we need to keep more of our own money. Throughout history most free societies have been destroyed from within by profligate spending and onerous taxation. If you want to give more money to government, be my guest, but brush up on your American History...and stay calm.
Bill Heuisler "
There is more, too, at the above link.
If only we have voters come out to put him in office, Dr. Melancon, a history prof at Southeastern Oklahoma State University, would represent us in Congress. I hope so.
posted by Ruth
Here it is:
"......Histrionically, those with property and large incomes were not taxed. In fact governments went to great lengths to avoid upsetting the wealthy by using excise and poll taxes. These regressive taxes allowed the wealthy to keep much of what they earned and pass it on to their offsprings. According to Mr. Heuisler hypothesis, the pre-twentieth century world should have been one of general prosperity. We all know that this was not the case. It was a world in which a tiny elite enjoyed a life of relative material well-being, while the masses lead of life struggling to reach subsistence. The progressive income tax, the New Deal and the Welfare State provided for a more equitable distribution of wealth by shifting the tax burden to those who could best afford to pay. This “Robinhood” approach, to use the confiscation metaphor, not only helped those at the bottom of the scale by promoted the “Wealth of the Nation.” Who could argue that the “rich” have been hurt by the last fifty years of Liberal Economics? As Keynes pointed out, the jobless make poor consumers. Through programs like Social Security, Medicare, Food Stamps, Housing Assistance and other government programs the poor become consumers. Where do they spend this new found “wealth”? In the very businesses that decry high taxes. It is in everyone’s interest to keep the progressive tax structure. The supply-side model may put more money in the hands of investors, but they will simply hoard their wealth like the feudal lords of old if there are no consumers to buy the supply.
[ Reply ] [ Return to Comments ]
Glenn's histrionics (#8156)
by Bill Heuisler on February 10, 2003 at 9:08 PM
Mr. Melancon has evidently learned his history at Boston U. under the grim tutelage of Howard Zinn. Some of his lines are near quotes from one or another Zinn polemic. Others are...
His second sentence: "Histrionically, those with property and large incomes were not taxed."
He might have something. Does Boston U. have a theater group?
Bill Heuisler
[ Reply ] [ Return to Comments ]
He DOES Have Something: Truth! (#8165)
by Tom Kellum on February 10, 2003 at 11:21 PM
Mr. Melancon DOES have something. Something that Mr. Heuisler was not able to refute. Something that so rattled Mr. Heuisler that all he could in response is engage in two ad hominen attacks: one on the great Howard Zinn, and one on Mr. Melancon.
It is odd that there are still some people in this country who pine for the economic mess that Reagan put us in. Debt farther than the eyes can see. Now, President HappyCrack is repeating the Reagan model. Yessir, transfer all of that money to the rich (don't forget the Carlyle Group), and then there won't be any left to give to those left-wing state universities who pay professors to indocrinate students with an idealized fantasy of what the first 150+ years of our nation's history was like for everyone except the families of rich, white, property-owning males.
No thanks, Mr. Heuisler. That may be what you want to go back to, and "President" Bush is doing his best to get you there; but I'm not interested.
[ Reply ] [ Return to Comments ]
RE: Glenn's histrionics (#8166)
by Glenn Melancon on February 10, 2003 at 11:23 PM
Your rebuttal is an ad hominen attack?
Surely you do not wish to argue that America was a better place before Liberalism–no food regulations, no work place safety regulations, no environmental protection, no women’s suffrage, no civil rights for African Americans, no unemployment benefits, no Social Security? Which of these progressive programs would you repeal? Or maybe you would like to cut the size of the military during war time?
I will admit that Soviet style central planning was a complete failure, if you admit that the mixed US economy was a roaring success. No Liberal wants to institute the policies of Joseph Stalin. We simply want a system that creates opportunity. FDR laid a foundation on which Americans can be proud. Rejecting Fascism and Communism at a time of despair, the Americans of the 1930 created the opportunities that many enjoy today. Goldwater and Reagan (and now George II) wanted to destroy that legacy. To return to the policies of the nineteenth century would be an utter failure.
[ Reply ] [ Return to Comments ]
RE: Glenn's histrionics (#8176)
by Bill Heuisler on February 11, 2003 at 12:56 AM
Mr. Melancon,
You brought up histrionics - a refreshing change-of-pace.
And it was big of you to admit the failure of Soviet Communism ten years after it imploded. Government planning doesn't work.
As to your pseudo-history, no one mentioned Liberalism but you. Government does not create opportunity, individuals do. The 1964 Civil Rights Act passed with a majority of Republican votes and only a minority of Democrats, women's sufferage passed while Republicans were in control and only months before Warren Harding was inaugurated. The rest of your list was put into place with the aid of Congresses and Presidents of both parties.
Now let's focus on the HNN comment about Americans being suspicious of W's tax cuts. You seem fixated on how terrible the United States has become under Reagan and the Bushes and how wonderful Socialism would be. You've apparently read Howard Zinn and therefore hate this country and our free-market system as it has evolved. That's fine, but has nothing to do with the article.
The article in question opposes President Bush's tax cuts and proposes taxing each American "transaction" from paycheck to death. Do you favor more taxation? Income? Sales? How much more?
My position is that we need the tax cuts - we need to keep more of our own money. Throughout history most free societies have been destroyed from within by profligate spending and onerous taxation. If you want to give more money to government, be my guest, but brush up on your American History...and stay calm.
Bill Heuisler "
There is more, too, at the above link.
If only we have voters come out to put him in office, Dr. Melancon, a history prof at Southeastern Oklahoma State University, would represent us in Congress. I hope so.
posted by Ruth
posted by Diane at 11:05 AM
2 Comments:
Throughout history most free societies have been destroyed from within by profligate spending and onerous taxation.
Instead of following this whopper with examples to back up such ludricous "revealed wisdom" fantasy, we get...
brush up on your American History
Hah! Yes, unrecognized self-parody is the highest form of humor.
Thank you, melio, guess you're okay with the deficit we're running up under the 'neocon' admin? Self-parody is definitely what's happening.
from Ruth
Post a Comment
<< Home