Today is the 10th anniversary of the Bush Tax Cuts, so lets look at what they have wrought.
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Today is the 10th anniversary of the Bush Tax Cuts, so lets look at what they have wrought.
And ALL brought to you by a Democratic Party controlled Government.
Isn't it time for a REAL change?
2012
You can distort and lie all you want but it's not going to create and jobs. Your Obamasiah is a dismal failure and then sooner he is out the better for America.
Today is the 10th anniversary of the Bush Tax Cuts, so lets look at what they have wrought.
The tax decrease resulted in increased revenue. As to how the tax cut resulted in any of the ten mentioned items defies logic. Logic and reason are foreign to the left wing mind, such as it is.
"The tax decrease resulted in increased revenue. As to how the tax cut resulted in any of the ten mentioned items defies logic. Logic and reason are foreign to the left wing mind, such as it is."
I'm not going to agree with Dittohead and declare his list of problems all a result of the Bush tax cuts. However, your logic in crediting the cuts with increased revenue is as logically flawed as his argument that they cause all the problems. Just because B follows A doesn't mean A caused B. Income tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was actually much less under Bush than under Clinton. Revenue increases are most likely attributable to GDP growth from the housing bubble - the same bubble than can take credit for most of the things Ditto listed.
At some point, you folks who defend our current President are gonna have to decide on what part of his administration is HIS, and "take ownership"! Bill Clinton did more with an "opposing" Congress than President Obama, (with a Democrat-controlled one) even had the "Audacity" to hope for.....and I'm no fan Clinton.
They would follow Obama over a cliff. Hopefully they don't take the whole country with them.
Today is the 10th anniversary of the Bush Tax Cuts, so lets look at what they have wrought.
The tax decrease resulted in increased revenue. As to how the tax cut resulted in any of the ten mentioned items defies logic. Logic and reason are foreign to the left wing mind, such as it is.
Liar.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org...yafact.cfm?Docid=200
Tax revenues decreased YoY from 200 to 2005. While spending increased.
Soooo... if 06-07-2011 is the ten year anniversary to the passage of the "Bush Tax cuts", they came before 09-11-2001. Surmise away!
Today is the 10th anniversary of the Bush Tax Cuts, so lets look at what they have wrought.
The tax decrease resulted in increased revenue. As to how the tax cut resulted in any of the ten mentioned items defies logic. Logic and reason are foreign to the left wing mind, such as it is.
Liar.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org...yafact.cfm?Docid=200
Tax revenues decreased YoY from 200 to 2005. While spending increased.
Are you running the BS train full time now??? You can run these number anyway you care to and the results will be the same...unless you are just plain stupid.
February 19, 2009
The tax decrease resulted in increased revenue. As to how the tax cut resulted in any of the ten mentioned items defies logic. Logic and reason are foreign to the left wing mind, such as it is.
Liar.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org...yafact.cfm?Docid=200
Tax revenues decreased YoY from 200 to 2005. While spending increased.
Are you running the BS train full time now??? You can run these number anyway you care to and the results will be the same...unless you are just plain stupid.
February 19, 2009
"Are you running the BS train full time now??? "
I believe this shows Mr. Ditto to be exactly the creature he accused Interventor to be.
Federal spending increased every year, despite revenue declines, resulting in $300billion deficits. That is a fact.
In 2005, when federal revs increased back to the 2000 year level, it was mostly due to increased corp tax revs, not individual income tax.
Reagan invented deficit spending, so BushIIe cant be blamed for following the Repub God, and everyone knows BushIIe never had an original idea of his own.
Federal spending increased every year, despite revenue declines, resulting in $300billion deficits. That is a fact.
In 2005, when federal revs increased back to the 2000 year level, it was mostly due to increased corp tax revs, not individual income tax.
Reagan invented deficit spending, so BushIIe cant be blamed for following the Repub God, and everyone knows BushIIe never had an original idea of his own.
So, if you can't provide proof...just "spin"?
I thought so.
"The tax decrease resulted in increased revenue. As to how the tax cut resulted in any of the ten mentioned items defies logic. Logic and reason are foreign to the left wing mind, such as it is."
I'm not going to agree with Dittohead and declare his list of problems all a result of the Bush tax cuts. However, your logic in crediting the cuts with increased revenue is as logically flawed as his argument that they cause all the problems. Just because B follows A doesn't mean A caused B. Income tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was actually much less under Bush than under Clinton. Revenue increases are most likely attributable to GDP growth from the housing bubble - the same bubble than can take credit for most of the things Ditto listed.
Please correlate income tax revenue increase to housing bubble (inflated cost of housing). I understand how the dotcom bomb bubble caused false economic boom. The housing bubble existed for several decades.
They would follow Obama over a cliff. Hopefully they don't take the whole country with them.
Its a good way to clear out the riff/raff. See lemming migration!
Today is the 10th anniversary of the Bush Tax Cuts, so lets look at what they have wrought.
The tax decrease resulted in increased revenue. As to how the tax cut resulted in any of the ten mentioned items defies logic. Logic and reason are foreign to the left wing mind, such as it is.
Liar.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org...yafact.cfm?Docid=200
Tax revenues decreased YoY from 200 to 2005. While spending increased.
From your source, with income in billions:
2001 1991.1
2002 1853.1
2003 1782.3
2004 1880.1
2005 2153.6
2006 2406.9
2007 2568.0
2008 2524.0
2009 2105.0
Bush signed his major tax cut in May 2003. Then, the revenue shot up. The decrease over the first three years was from recovery from the dotcom bubble under Clinton.
A man with a shred of decency would remove the claim of liar. A man of honor would not have used it. I expect, neither from this source.
At present, blame may go to Democrats, Republicans or the great god Vog! It really doesn't matter. The debt must be brought under control and decreased, or simple service of the debt will require a larger and larger portion of the national income.
Bush signed his major tax cut in May 2003. Then, the revenue shot up. The decrease over the first three years was from recovery from the dotcom bubble under Clinton.
A man with a shred of decency would remove the claim of liar. A man of honor would not have used it. I expect, neither from this source.
I give as I get.
Your rationalization fails. You can keep repeating it, but no one believes you.
The increase in revs in 2006-2008 was mostly corporate income tax collections increases, as I pointed out already.
Federal spending increased every year, despite revenue declines...
Tax hikers and tax cutters can spin the data anyway they want...but spending is the problem.
"Please correlate income tax revenue increase to housing bubble (inflated cost of housing). I understand how the dotcom bomb bubble caused false economic boom. The housing bubble existed for several decades."
Well, this requires addressing a few issues.
1) The housing bubble didn't last for decades. Inflation adjusted housing prices remained pretty constant throughout the 1990's and skyrocketed through the 2000's before becoming unglued.
2) The housing bubble itself produced jobs and profitable opportunities. GDP grew strongly and steadily throughout that period.
3) As GDP grows, so too does income tax revenue, even if the cuts resulted in less revenue as a percentage of GDP than in prior years.
Bush signed his major tax cut in May 2003. Then, the revenue shot up. The decrease over the first three years was from recovery from the dotcom bubble under Clinton.
A man with a shred of decency would remove the claim of liar. A man of honor would not have used it. I expect, neither from this source.
I give as I get.
Your rationalization fails. You can keep repeating it, but no one believes you.
The increase in revs in 2006-2008 was mostly corporate income tax collections increases, as I pointed out already.
yes, I keep repeating the facts, just the facts. Sorry things, facts, to the left, that is!
The left fails to recognize cause and effect. For about the tenth time, as to corporate income tax collections, raising, of course, they rose. That's the other half of the equation, when individual income taxes are cut.
When people perceive they have more income for the foreseeable future, they spend more -- more on goods and services. Corporations produce goods and provide services. Having sold more, the corporations pay more taxes. What part of that don't you understand!
Housing starts rose consistently since a 1990 low. Indicating the boom under lied the entire two decades. http://forecastchart.com/graph-housing-starts.html
"Housing starts rose consistently since a 1990 low. Indicating the boom under lied the entire two decades."
Housing starts aren't extremely relevant here. Even if they were, they never exceeded previous levels. Home prices paint a much more accurate picture, as they tell the story of how much money was involved in the bubble, not just a number of units.
