Conservative media take note: Reagan preached tax cut gospel to America’s students
September 03, 2009 1:09 pm ET by Matt Gertz
Putting aside possible ulterior motives, the conservative freak-out over President Obama’s planned speech to students urging them to stay in school and work hard is due to fears that Obama will use his platform as an opportunity to push his agenda on unsuspecting students. Ironically, that’s exactly what President Reagan did two decades ago.
On November 14, 1988, Reagan addressed and took questions from students from four area middle schools in the Old Executive Office Building. According to press secretary Marlin Fitzwater, the speech was broadcast live and rebroadcast by C-Span, and Instructional Television Network fed the program “t o schools nationwide on three different days.” Much of Reagan’s speech that day covered the American “vision of self-government” and the need “to keep faith with the unfinished vision of the greatness and wonder of America” but in the middle of the speech, the president went off on a tangent about the importance of low taxes:
Today, to a degree never before seen in human history, one nation, the United States, has become the model to be followed and imitated by the rest of the world. But America's world leadership goes well beyond the tide toward democracy. We also find that more countries than ever before are following America's revolutionary economic message of free enterprise, low taxes, and open world trade. These days, whenever I see foreign leaders, they tell me about their plans for reducing taxes, and other economic reforms that they are using, copying what we have done here in our country.
I wonder if they realize that this vision of economic freedom, the freedom to work, to create and produce, to own and use property without the interference of the state, was central to the American Revolution, when the American colonists rebelled against a whole web of economic restrictions, taxes and barriers to free trade. The message at the Boston Tea Party -- have you studied yet in history about the Boston Tea Party, where because of a tax they went down and dumped the tea in the Harbor. Well, that was America's original tax revolt, and it was the fruits of our labor -- it belonged to us and not to the state. And that truth is fundamental to both liberty and prosperity.
During the question-and-answer portion of the event, Reagan returned to the topic, this time telling the students that lowering taxes increases revenue:
Q My name is Cam Fitzie and I'm from St. Agnes School in Alexandria, Virginia. I was wondering if you think that it is possible to decrease the national debt without raising the taxes of the public?
PRESIDENT REAGAN: I do. That's a big argument that's going on in government and I definitely believe it is because one of the principle reasons that we were able to get the economy back on track and create those new jobs and all was we cut the taxes, we reduced them. Because you see, the taxes can be such a penalty on people that there's no incentive for them to prosper and to earn more and so forth because they have to give so much to the government. And what we have found is that at the lower rates the government gets more revenue, there are more people paying taxes because there are more people with jobs and there are more people willing to earn more money because they get to keep a bigger share of it, so today, we're getting more revenue at the lower rates than we were at the higher. And do you know something? I studied economics in college when I was young and I learned there about a man named Ibn Khaldun, who lived 1200 years ago in Egypt. And 1200 years ago he said, in the beginning of the empire, the rates were low, the tax rates were low, but the revenue was great. He said in the end of empire, when the empire was collapsing, the rates were great and the revenue was low.
The students probably didn’t know any better, but this is an idea that has been rejected by virtually every economist not named Larry Kudlow.
Do Sean Hannity and the folks at NewsBusters think President Reagan was engaging in Maoist indoctrination? Do Glenn Beck and WorldNetDaily think Reagan was pulling a Mussolini or attempting to assemble his own Hitler Youth? Or is it possible that the conservative media has decided that if Obama is for it – whether “it” means “universal health care” or “stay in school” – they’re against it?











Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Contrary to media hype, Sarah Palin is very unpopular




He gave Arms to the Terrorist State Iran like he wasn't the President but instead was Caesar.
At the begining of the AIDS Crisis this Man stuck his head in the Sand.
This was done because He was either Unaware or He just didn't Care about the Rights of the Gay Man.
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
You can talk truth to power, but power usually ignores you, does what it wants and sleeps well at night.
Even Reagan's budget director admitted it :
Reagan nearly tripled the debt even after instituting 7 tax increases.
In January 1981, when Reagan declared the federal budget to be "out of control," the deficit had reached almost $74 billion, the federal debt $930 billion.
Within two years, the deficit was $208 billion. The debt by 1988 totaled $2.6 trillion.
In those eight years, the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the largest debtor nation.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26402-2004Jun8?language=printer
Treasury Site where you can verify the information
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo4.htm
Hmmmm.... I guess that didn't work out quite like what he expected.
As far as the whole "low taxes means more revenue" that only works when people are making that much more money. If it happens to be that people don't make a lot, while taxes are high, the revenue will reflect that. If people are making a lot of money during low tax times, then the revenue reflects that. The whole "trickle down" theory has been debunked. All it did was allow the rich to accumulate even more wealth, while the middle and lower classes lost wealth.
Ha ha, just kidding, they'll say Stockman was a leftist plant or disgruntled RINO, and carry on.
Get businesses to stop advertising on Fox - period!
America has become the laughing-stock of the world.
We've degenerated into a dysfunctional society of whiners.
And Fox is leading the way.
PRESIDENT REAGAN: I do, unfortunately, I added on 20,5%debt/GDP. To put that in context, I was the first President to increase our debt%/GDP, since 1945! (Not counting Nixon/Ford's pathetic 0,1% increase of course)
I started a trend that raised our debt%/GDP from 32.6% to 75.5% in 2009! Remember, it would've been greater if it weren't for that "tax & spend" yahoo Bill Clinton!
The important lesson to be learned here? By simply duping the American public, my rich friends and I have just gotten richer, and the kicker? I'm remembered as a "fiscally conservative" President!
You are all missing the point. Reagan was about to leave office for one. So, he may have been talking about issues but he certainly wasn't trying to sell the presidency or himself. The people who were angry weren't just conservative right, it was mainly educators in general. No expert in their field wants to be told how to do their job. They certainly don't want to teach their students to adore an individual. Was the President's speech possibly just a pep talk about doing well in schooL? Quite possibly it was. But the lesson plans asked children to support the president and specifically President Obama. This was the problem that caused many to be upset. Is it good to support the President? Sure it is. But forcing them to do so is contrary to free thinking and learning. This website is amazing, because it always rips on conservatives for their views, but acts as if liberals shouldn't be ripped for theirs. Double standards don't make for educated conversation.
Consider yourself ripped, ravaged and torn to pieces, if it makes you happy.
Pile on some unsupported claims, and the obligatory abuse of the term "double standard", and we have another cookie cutter wingnut joke .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-y2QghS2gU
Where was your outrage at this, and let us not forget the loyalty oaths people had to sign to get into see President Bush,or Monica Gooding and the turning of the DOJ into a department of loyal Bushies.
There is not f**ing point except that the Republicans want to vilify the president no matter what he does. That is the only point. This is absolutely insane to defend the this right wing crap.
link
Also, my name isn't Kudlow and I think the Laffer Curve makes a lot of sense. You can and will reduce revenue by taxing small business into stagnation if not into flight right out of the country. Permanent new jobs come from thriving new small businesses, not government programs.
On November 14, 1988, Reagan addressed and took questions from students from four area middle schools in the Old Executive Office Building. According to press secretary Marvin Fitzwater, the speech was broadcast live and rebroadcast by C-Span, and Instructional Television Network fed the program "to schools nationwide on three different days."
Small businesses do not face any new taxes. The 1% of the population who earned 21.2% of all income in 05, now they face the removal of some shrub era tax breaks. So they'll maybe have to wait a year or so for that new boat/airplane/professional sports team, or recondition their misstress collection.
On November 14, 1988, Reagan addressed and took questions from students from four area middle schools in the Old Executive Office Building. According to press secretary Marvin Fitzwater, the speech was broadcast live and rebroadcast by C-Span, and Instructional Television Network fed the program âto schools nationwide on three different days."
When you become a well-educated economist who can make a determination about the trickle down theory, get back to us.
Let me repeat: this whole debate is completely moronic. I can't even believe we are having this. I have read Huxley, but from your quote, you apparently have not.
Permanent new jobs are not coming from thriving new small businesses or government programs, they're coming from established multinational corporations. The reason? Your precious trickle down economics. The reduced tax on the wealthy gives them immense power to muscle your thriving small businesses in to obscurity.
It's been a part of tax theory since late ancient times that you're going to get more tax revenue from those who can afford to part with it. This is why, pre-Reagan, taxes on the upper echelon of income earners were higher. Taxing me 28% isn't going to net you anywhere as much revenue as taxing Bill Gates 40%, and Bill Gates isn't going to notice because he makes billions. The typical response to that being "he earned it, let him keep it!" The idea that any one man has an inalienable right to control that much of the country's wealth is just as stupid as mom and pop going to China. The greater your wealth, the greater your responsibility to the government. Such is the nature of income taxation. According to Republicans, though, the only way to save small business is to ensure that the insanely wealthy keep their money. Thus destroying small business when the insanely wealthy use that money to push mom and pop out.
Are you still not seeing it? It's really quite plain.
my father a longtime republican switched over. i have long been considering doing so myself
president obama has been subjected to such standards since his elections.
-he has been asked to provide a birthe certificate when no president EVER has had to do so.
-he wants to give a speech about staying in school and doing well and people are demanding to see the speech beforehand and see if it meets with their approval.
-he has been called a Marxist, Maoist, Communist, Socialist, RACIST, to a degree never EVER heard of before. (the last few presidents have been called some of these things or others at varying points but not to the almost daily degree of the current president.)
-the president gets called "barack the magic negro" and a song is made about it. was there ever a time that bill clinton got called an ignorant hick because he was from Arkansas? or Gore for that matter as well since he was from Tennessee?
the answer is simply no. this is what infuriates me more than anything. i hated bush 43. i disagreed with him on everything possible and im a Rpublican. i didn't respect the man, but i respected the office, and thats what this is all about. the respect for the current man does not exist nor does there seem to be any respect for the office because of the man currently sitting in the office.
Also, my name isn't Kudlow and I think the Laffer Curve makes a lot of sense. You can and will reduce revenue by taxing small business into stagnation if not into flight right out of the country. Permanent new jobs come from thriving new small businesses, not government programs.
It is to Laff.
Me thinks this is 'no difference'.
He was actually making that claim. Another bizarre instant in our discourse.
I would think an author would take some responsibility for words written on his own book, but if you'd rather believe Ridge "just because", you're welcome to do so, and I'm not surprised.
There's nothing wrong with ANY President, including President Obama, talking to students - ever.
If President Reagan inappropriately used that venue to indoctrinate children to conservatism, then it was wrong.
If President Obama inappropriately uses this venue to indoctrinate children to liberalism, then it is wrong as well.
Schools should teach facts, and show theories on all sides of any issue.
If they focus on politics, then fairly show all forms of ideology.
Schools have long been a platform for liberal teachers, professors, and administrators to spread their agendas.
Just like the Madrasas in Islam, they force their slanted views upon students.
That kind of indoctrination needs to stop on ALL fronts, be it conservative OR liberal.
What is that difference? Could you be more specific?
If he uses it as an opportunty to get the young generation on board with his policies, I am against. (jpeagle21)
Did you have the same problems with Reagan's promoting policy to kids?
Did you have the same problems with Reagan's promoting policy to kids that you do with your predictions of Obama pomoting policy to kids?
I know, it's pretty funny that a Reagan-worshiping conservative would misspell The Messiah's name, but I wasn't going to focus on that.
Early in Reagan's term, congress passed the Economic Recovery Act of 1981.
According to the Congressional Summary of Receipts, Outlays, Surpluses,and Deficits, federal receipts in 1982 were 617 Billion and this increased to 991.20 billion in 1989. Federal receipts grew substantially AFTER marginal tax rates were reduced.
And lets' not forget Herbert Hoover who cut taxes for the rich leading up to Great Depression. How'd that work out?
The Bush lesson plan on biographies took no stand of which biography the children should read... and as of 2008, there were plenty of negative biographies that could have been incorporated into that lesson plan.
On the other hand, Obama's plan asked the children to read books written by Obama himself.
It's not rocket science to understand the gaping difference between those two requests.
Furthermore, the "Freedom Timeline" had lesson plan contained five stories: a 1777 spy that saved Washington's campaign, 1831 The Underground railroad, 1886 the statue of Liberty, 1938 The March of Dimes, 1948 Berlin Airlift. None of these are remotely connected to any Bush policy.
On the other hand, the Obama lesson plan engages children directly in Obama's policies asking children "Are we able to do what President Obama is asking of us?", and other requests that are completely inappropriate for a grade school classroom.
As for the longer Reagan section, there is a minor inaccuracy in the barb following Reagan's tax cut spiel... it should read "uniformly accepted only by people named Kudlow, patently rejected only by those named Krugman, and hotly debated by everyone else."
As for "Are we able to do what President Obama is asking of us?", if the president asks kids to encourage their parents to support the public option, that's one thing. If the president asks kids to stay in school and work hard and make plans for the future, I'm not seeing the problem.
I think the majority of kids would see thru the latter really quick, probably completely bamboozle them with questions they stutter over and Obama would shine. Either way FOX News would get to spin it as a victory for fair and balanced and at least Obama would get his time.
The colonies did not rebel because of Government intrusion into their lives, nor did they rebel because of taxes. They rebelled because of
"TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION."
"House Democrats criticized President Bush yesterday for using Education Department funds to produce and broadcast a speech that he made Tuesday at a Northwest Washington junior high school.
The Democratic critics accused Bush of turning government money for education to his own political use, namely, an ongoing effort to inoculate himself against their charges of inattention to domestic issues. The speech at Alice Deal Junior High School, broadcast live on radio and television, urged students to study hard, avoid drugs and turn in troublemakers.
'The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students,' House Majority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) said. "And the president should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.' "
Two House committees demanded that the department explain the use of its funds for the speech, an explanation that Deputy Secretary David T. Kearns provided late in the day in a letter to Rep. William D. Ford (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee. Education Secretary Lamar Alexander was out of town. [...]
Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colo.), chairwoman of the Select Committee on Children, Youth and Families, said it was outrageous for the White House to 'start using precious dollars for campaigns' when 'we are struggling for every silly dime we can get' for education programs."
If the conservative media "has decided that if Obama is for it â whether âitâ means âuniversal health careâ or âstay in schoolâ â theyâre against it", it looks like they learned it from the Democrats.
So video of the event still exists and NBC has it on file. Someone needs to contact them and obtain the full tape.
All of the above are more credible than the band of kooks, charlatins, liars and jokers trying to 'school' us on Fox,WND and A.M. radio. This is desparation x 1000. These terrorist attacks against the president will not go unpunished. We must bring back the [b]Fairness Doctrine[b]in order to shut down the right wing smear machine.