Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:
Originally Posted by interventor1212:
Originally Posted by Mr.Dittohead:
Today is the 10th anniversary of the Bush Tax Cuts, so lets look at what they have wrought.
- Dismal Economic Growth
- A Decade of Budget Deficits
- Red Ink as Far as the Eye Can See
- Disastrous Job Creation
- Declining Incomes
- Increasing Poverty
- A Massive Windfall for the Wealthy
- Record Income Inequality
- A Sagging Stock Market
- Jeopardizing Future Economic Growth
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
Who Are the Big Spenders?
Myth. Our national debt doubled in the last eight years.
Fact. Nope, no matter how you measure it. In fact, if adjusted for inflation, real economic growth and population growth, it didn't budge at all.
Here are the national debt figures in 2000 (President Clinton's last full year) and as currently estimated for 2008 (President Bush's last full year), as provided by our government.
2000 2008 % Increase
Total Debt (dollars) $5,628.7B $9,654.4B 72%
Held by Public ($) $3,409.8B $5,428.6B 59%
Total Debt (%GDP) 58.0% 67.5% 16%
Held by Public (%GDP) 35.1% 37.9% 8%
By no measure did the debt "double" (increase 100%) in the last eight years. By using total debt in nominal dollars, you get to only a 72% increase, not a doubling. But that is nominal dollars, which includes both inflation and real economic growth in a country growing in population. Plus, the "total" debt includes what the government owes itself; it is a figment of government accounting.
The most meaningful number, which is the amount of government debt held by the public (you, me and China) as a fraction of GDP, went up by only 8%. If you also take population growth into account, the amount of debt per capita remained virtually flat the last eight years. (The CIA World Factbook says our current population growth rate is 0.883%. Over eight years, that would lead to an increase of 7.3%, or just about what the debt grew by.)
Was President Obama lying? Of course not. He just sees a glass that is 99% empty as 100% full. He visited 57 states, remember ?
Myth. President Bush increased spending dramatically. Specifically, he spent more than President Clinton did, dramatically increasing our national debt.
Fact. Only if measured in nominal dollars. But by that measure, or even in inflation-adjusted dollars, Clinton spent more than Bush 41, who spent more than Reagan, who spent more than Carter, on down the line. Measured in a meaningful way, namely as a fraction of GDP, Bush spent less than the pre-Bush average, including that of President Clinton. Similarly, he kept national debt below the pre-Bush average.