Today's Republicans might view Ronald Reagan as a "wild-eyed, socialist, tax-hiking class warrior," and the late conservative icon's views on taxes might have disqualified him from the party's nomination in 2012, President Barack Obama said Wednesday.

Obama, defending his "Buffett Rule" call for higher taxes on the very rich, said in a speech that he was "not the first president to call for this idea that everybody has got to do their fair share." He went on to say:

Some years ago, one of my predecessors traveled across the country pushing for the same concept. He gave a speech where he talked about a letter he had received from a wealthy executive who paid lower tax rates than his secretary, and wanted to come to Washington and tell Congress why that was wrong. So this president gave another speech where he said it was "crazy"—that's a quote—that certain tax loopholes make it possible for multimillionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10 percent of his salary. That wild-eyed, socialist, tax-hiking class warrior was Ronald Reagan.

He thought that, in America, the wealthiest should pay their fair share, and he said so. I know that position might disqualify him from the Republican primaries these days, but what Ronald Reagan was calling for then is the same thing that we're calling for now: a return to basic fairness and responsibility; everybody doing their part. And if it will help convince folks in Congress to make the right choice, we could call it the Reagan Rule instead of the Buffett Rule.

Yet Reagan also championed the very same "trickle-down" economics that Obama has roundly denounced—the idea that tax cuts for the wealthy lead to investment that generates growth and thereby jobs. Obama on Tuesday described this economic policy in harsh terms, saying its supporters "don't seem to understand how it is that America got built."

"In this country, prosperity has never trickled down from the wealthy few," he said. "Prosperity has always come from the bottom up, from a strong and growing middle class."

Obama lumped trickle-down economics among "old broken-down theories" that he blamed for the 2008 global economic meltdown.


I actually agree with him on this...

Perhaps you should stay on your own side of the fence.....lol

Trickle down is ********! The wealthy should pay more than middle class which currently they do not thanks to all the loop holes.

It's BS! Re-election talking points and rhetoric hype only....AGAIN!

The upper-middle class (what's left of them) and the rich are the only ones making enough to even tax! Over 50% of Americans currently don't make enough to "pay" taxes, and actually get money back at tax time! This idiot "food stamp" president and his "welfare state" policies are the major cause of a great deal of it!

Taxing the rich is fine, they can afford it, but IT IS NOT A SOLUTION TO AN OUT OF CONTROL LEGISLATIVE BRANCH THAT CAN'T CONTROL THEIR SPENDING!

It's peanuts! Obamacare will cost taxpayers an estimated $13 TRILLION in the next 10 years alone! The national debt now exceeds the national GDP!

Our credit rating has just been lowered yet again!

BRICS is in meetings to remove the dollar as the world currency!

Owe-Bummer says we need to borrow another $1.3 Trillion just to meet his current budget!

All this while his daughter, age 13, and 12 friends, along with 2 jetliners and 25 secret service agents (not to mention the other "nessessary" personnel and precautions required) vacation in Mexico for spring break.....ALSO ON THE TAXPAYERS DIME! This little vacation alone will cost taxpayers more than most American families make in a lifetime!

This idiot has to go!!!!!!

"Prosperity has always come from the bottom up, from a strong and growing middle class."


This comment proves he has absolutely no clue about economics or the business cycle and how it works..

well, i don't know a lot either, but trickle down has been proven to not work... it seems to me that the more money the lower and middle class has, the more will be spent in the economy. the upper class may have the money to start businesses, but they will not do it if no one has the money to spend at their business...

US GDP in 1980 was about $3 trillion..

Its now over $14 trillion..

Net Worth of Family households was $10 trillion in 1980

Today it is $54 trillion.. That is with a loss of $10 trillion since the recession started.


In 1980 mandatory spending was about 7% of GDP.. That is 7% of $3 trillion.

In 2010 mandatory spending was over 10% of GDP. That is 10% of $14 trillion


Total tax revenue in 1980 was $500 billion..

Total tax revenue in 2010 was $2.5 trillion


The idea that increasing taxes is the answer, which by the way is the antithesis of Reagans policy, can be shown by the numbers to be BS.

Taking more taxes and allowing the government to decide which crony gets it is just adding to their power.

The power the government has comes from the money it can distribute.

What the hell are lobbyists lobbying for?

MORE MONEY..

You want to fix the problems you reduce the amount of money the government has to dole out not increase it..