Jimmy Carter Appreciation Thread

#451
#451
RavinDave said:
Not to mention the malaise. I loved Carter the man. But as POTUS, not so much. Neither here nor there, but I still have the image in my mind of the front cover of Newsweek in Sep-1976 at my campsite in Glacier Park (highlight of my bicentennial, just graduated from UT, cross-country motorcycle ride) with drops of grizzly bear blood dotting the picture of Jimmy.
Click to expand...
anyone else thinking ... what the heck is the rest of the story?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RavinDave
#466
#466
screenthis said:
Arguable. In my mind, Reagan brought us trickle down economics and a massive boon to high earners
Click to expand...
There is no such thing as trickle down economics. that's a DEM made up term

If there were such a thing as trickle down economics, I would rather have trickle down economics rather than the Dem's trickle up socialist poverty.

From Wikipedia:

Reagan tax cuts - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

"The top marginal rate fluctuated between 70% and 92% on the 200,000th to the 400,000th dollar (the bracket on which the rate was charged was changed as well) over the following 20 years. During this time the Social Security Act created a Social Security tax, though because the Social Security tax is capped at ~$130,000 per individual this did not add to the overall top marginal rate. Under President John F. Kennedy the top marginal rate was decreased in the Revenue Act of 1964 to 70%. In 1980 Ronald Reagan was elected and promised to cut the top marginal tax rate. This he did, and the top marginal tax rate was lowered over his 8 years in office from 73% to 28% on incomes over just $29,750 - the lowest this rate had been since 1925"

Dems had tax rates onerously high as 90%. Kennedy reduced it to 70% and Regan created the economic boom in the eighties into the 90's.

-------------------

Community Reinvestment Acts was from Carter. Reagan and Vush 1 ignored it. Bubba Clinton put it into effect and it lead to the biggest economic meltdown in the history of the country if not the world.

Carter was a socialist. He was a buddy to socialists..

Carter took sides against the US....


 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NEO, W.TN.Orange Blood, TNVOLNAVY and 1 other person
#468
#468
wtmvol said:
I'm good friends with a family that I'll just say was very connected to the Carter presidency. It was a different time in politics, that's for sure. I wasn't alive at that point, but I've never heard anyone say anything negative about Carter the person. Worst I've heard was "good man but terrible president". Maybe he's like the opposite of Bill Clinton, who I think was a pretty good president and an objectively bad person.
Click to expand...
There were a lot of good things that happened while Clinton was President that he didn't really have anything to do with, which is why he is remembered as a good President. Computer/internet-driven productivity boom, afterglow of the end of the Cold War.

Carter's name comes up very quickly on a "bad Presidents" list, but we've done far worse than Jimmy Carter. In just the 20th Century, Woodrow Wilson and LBJ for starters. Both were horrible Presidents and an objectively horrible human beings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 825VOL and hog88
#469
#469
05_never_again said:
There were a lot of good things that happened while Clinton was President that he didn't really have anything to do with, which is why he is remembered as a good President. Computer/internet-driven productivity boom, afterglow of the end of the Cold War.
Click to expand...

I think the thing that makes Clinton a relatively OK president is that he didn't GAF about anything. Republicans balanced the budget and it seemed like a popular idea? Ok, I'll sign off on it. I just feel like most other POTUSes wouldn't allow the opposition to have victories like that.

Clinton just wanted the path of least resistance, which isn't always gonna work out, but it was a good thing at the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlipKidVol and 05_never_again
#470
#470
n_huffhines said:
I think the thing that makes Clinton a relatively OK president is that he didn't GAF about anything. Republicans balanced the budget and it seemed like a popular idea? Ok, I'll sign off on it. I just feel like most other POTUSes wouldn't allow the opposition to have victories like that.

Clinton just wanted the path of least resistance, which isn't always gonna work out, but it was a good thing at the time.
Click to expand...
You can say that Clinton deserves credit for not screwing things up, yes. IMO Presidents can't really do all that much that is good, but they can stay out of the way and avoid doing things that are bad.

Politics are by definition tribal, but I think that "tribalness" ebbs and flows over time and he was President at a time where politics were not as tribal as other periods. I think he benefitted from that too, because to your point he didn't feel like he needed to deny the other side a political victory all the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: n_huffhines
#471
#471
jmacvols1 said:
There is no such thing as trickle down economics. that's a DEM made up term

If there were such a thing as trickle down economics, I would rather have trickle down economics rather than the Dem's trickle up socialist poverty.

From Wikipedia:

Reagan tax cuts - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

"The top marginal rate fluctuated between 70% and 92% on the 200,000th to the 400,000th dollar (the bracket on which the rate was charged was changed as well) over the following 20 years. During this time the Social Security Act created a Social Security tax, though because the Social Security tax is capped at ~$130,000 per individual this did not add to the overall top marginal rate. Under President John F. Kennedy the top marginal rate was decreased in the Revenue Act of 1964 to 70%. In 1980 Ronald Reagan was elected and promised to cut the top marginal tax rate. This he did, and the top marginal tax rate was lowered over his 8 years in office from 73% to 28% on incomes over just $29,750 - the lowest this rate had been since 1925"

Dems had tax rates onerously high as 90%. Kennedy reduced it to 70% and Regan created the economic boom in the eighties into the 90's.

-------------------

Community Reinvestment Acts was from Carter. Reagan and Vush 1 ignored it. Bubba Clinton put it into effect and it lead to the biggest economic meltdown in the history of the country if not the world.

Carter was a socialist. He was a buddy to socialists..

Carter took sides against the US....


Click to expand...

You ignorant magas are just full-time of hate and I think jealousy. Jimmy Carter was a patriotic Decorated Naval Officer. Trump is a lying grifter,and look who you worship.
 
#472
#472
n_huffhines said:
I think the thing that makes Clinton a relatively OK president is that he didn't GAF about anything. Republicans balanced the budget and it seemed like a popular idea? Ok, I'll sign off on it. I just feel like most other POTUSes wouldn't allow the opposition to have victories like that.

Clinton just wanted the path of least resistance, which isn't always gonna work out, but it was a good thing at the time.
Click to expand...

Oh, Clinton resisted. Remember that the .gov was shut down twice while Clinton was in office, it was after the 94 mid term where he lost congress (badly) he decided that he liked being POTUS more than sticking to his (at the time) wildly liberal policies. He got a little hard headed in his second term also.
 
#473
#473
05_never_again said:
There were a lot of good things that happened while Clinton was President that he didn't really have anything to do with, which is why he is remembered as a good President. Computer/internet-driven productivity boom, afterglow of the end of the Cold War.

Carter's name comes up very quickly on a "bad Presidents" list, but we've done far worse than Jimmy Carter. In just the 20th Century, Woodrow Wilson and LBJ for starters. Both were horrible Presidents and an objectively horrible human beings.
Click to expand...

Every president does good and bad things....the thing about JC is that the really bad things tended to have short-term effects (gas shortage, Iranian hostage crisis) and the good things tended to have a lasting impact (Volcker's monetary policies, deregulation).

Take for example, the Reagan administration....he didn't have anything as glaringly stupid as the gas shortage during his presidency, but he really ramped up the war on drugs and 40 years later we're still spending $40B-$50B a year on it, violating freedoms, and ruining countless lives. Jimmy Carter's name comes up, and Republicans freak out about the gas shortages. Reagan's name comes up and nobody mentions the war on drugs, even though there is a consensus now that it's been a total failure that we're still paying for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol and 05_never_again
#474
#474
hog88 said:
Oh, Clinton resisted. Remember that the .gov was shut down twice while Clinton was in office, it was after the 94 mid term where he lost congress (badly) he decided that he liked being POTUS more than sticking to his (at the time) wildly liberal policies. He got a little hard headed in his second term also.
Click to expand...

Whatever his motivations were, he could have easily vetoed it and he didn't.
 
#475
#475
jmacvols1 said:
There is no such thing as trickle down economics. that's a DEM made up term

If there were such a thing as trickle down economics, I would rather have trickle down economics rather than the Dem's trickle up socialist poverty.

From Wikipedia:

Reagan tax cuts - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

"The top marginal rate fluctuated between 70% and 92% on the 200,000th to the 400,000th dollar (the bracket on which the rate was charged was changed as well) over the following 20 years. During this time the Social Security Act created a Social Security tax, though because the Social Security tax is capped at ~$130,000 per individual this did not add to the overall top marginal rate. Under President John F. Kennedy the top marginal rate was decreased in the Revenue Act of 1964 to 70%. In 1980 Ronald Reagan was elected and promised to cut the top marginal tax rate. This he did, and the top marginal tax rate was lowered over his 8 years in office from 73% to 28% on incomes over just $29,750 - the lowest this rate had been since 1925"

Dems had tax rates onerously high as 90%. Kennedy reduced it to 70% and Regan created the economic boom in the eighties into the 90's.

-------------------

Community Reinvestment Acts was from Carter. Reagan and Vush 1 ignored it. Bubba Clinton put it into effect and it lead to the biggest economic meltdown in the history of the country if not the world.

Carter was a socialist. He was a buddy to socialists..

Carter took sides against the US....


Click to expand...

I do tire of corrosive, partisan politics that colors everything. Nick Adams X Profile: Alpha Male. Best selling author endorsed by President Trump. ugg.

Brigitte Gabriel is a Lebanese-American conservative activist, author and lecturer, and critic of Islam.

And Yes, there is such a thing as Trickle down. Look at any chart and suspiciously, the people at the very top income increased their income by thousands of percentage points during that wonderous and massive tax cut for the wealthy. Everybody else? Well, they largely didn't get a lot of benefit during the time of great productivity for our country.'

Carter was a bad 'post president'? Now that really is partisan. I do judge president's by what they do after they served in office. Carter is one of our greatest post-presidents, if not our greatest, ever. He didn't just go retire on some ranch. He worked tirelessly for a better world.

Now, perhaps also read some of the left-leaning sources on Carter. Not just these wacky right wing sources. Oh, and as President, hard to judge fully given circumstances and the short term. I'd say he was a 'fair' president and certainly faced tough times beyond his control including the Iran hostage situation.

As for Reagan, many positives as well as negatives. I do give him strong credit for bringing down the berlin wall (other factors as well) and handling of many international issues. Probably should not have served the second term as there were already signs of decline.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top