Debt Limit Deal: Almost 100% of the burden will be borne—via spending cuts—by the poor and the middle-class.

[웃 910]

In its January 2010 report, "The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2010 to 2020," t

Page 94 of this report:

Since 1970, total revenues have averaged just above 18

percent of GDP; they reached a high of 20.6 percent in

2000 and fell to a low of 14.8 percent in 2009. Receipts

from individual and corporate income taxes have been

especially volatile during the past 15 years or so. Between

1992 and 2000, individual income tax receipts grew at an

average annual rate of nearly 10 percent, reaching a peak

of 10.2 percent of GDP in 2000 (see Figure 4-3). For the

four years after 2000, individual receipts declined as a

share of GDP, falling to 6.9 percent of GDP by 2004.

The downturn in revenues began as a result of the stock

market decline and the 2001 recession, and it was rein-

forced by tax legislation enacted between 2001 and 2004.

^bolded - is that a nice way of saying the bush tax cuts contributed to decreased revenues

Page 27:

CBO’s Baseline Projections for

2011 to 2020

If various tax provisions enacted in the past decade expire

as scheduled and other spending and revenue policies are

also unchanged, the budget deficit will fall from 9.2 per-

cent of GDP this year to 3.2 percent by 2013, CBO pro-

jects. That drop in baseline deficits occurs because the

expiration of those tax provisions will boost revenues

substantially, the economy is expected to improve, and

spending related to the economic downturn will abate.

Page 96:

Individual Income Taxes

Individual income tax receipts account for four-fifths of

the projected increase in total revenues relative to GDP

over the next 10 years. Almost half of the increase in

those receipts relative to the size of the economy results

from the currently scheduled expiration of a host of tax

provisions.

Individual income tax receipts are projected to surge by

33 percent in 2011 and by 14 percent in 2012. The

increases are generated partly by faster growth in taxable

personal income (2.9 percent in 2011 and 5.4 percent in

2012) as the recovery strengthens. The more important

causes, however, are the scheduled changes to tax rules,

including the expiration of higher exemption amounts

for the individual AMT and the expiration after 2010 of

provisions originally enacted in 2001 in EGTRRA, in

2003 in JGTRRA, and in 2009 in ARRA.

Page 100: Effect of Expiring Tax Provisions on CBO’s Revenue Baseline

In preparing its revenue baseline, the Congressional

Budget Office (CBO) assumes that current law

remains in effect. Thus, CBO assumes that most cur-

rent tax provisions expire as scheduled and that no

additional legislation is enacted.1 Under that frame-

work, the baseline serves as a neutral benchmark that

legislators and others can apply as they assess the

potential effects of changes in policy.

The scheduled expiration of tax provisions has sub-

stantial consequences for CBO’s baseline projections,

especially after 2010, when most provisions originally

enacted in the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Rec-

onciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) and the Jobs and

Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 are

scheduled to expire. Altogether, CBO projects that

expiring tax provisions will increase revenues by

about 2.7 percentage points of gross domestic prod-

uct (GDP) between 2010 and 2012 (see the table to

the right) and that the revenue share of GDP will stay

approximately at that higher level until the end of the

projection period in 2020.2 The scheduled expiration

of lower tax rates on individual income, initially

enacted in 2001, will lead to the largest increase in

revenues relative to GDP—about 1.3 percent of

GDP between 2010 and 2012.

Embedded straight from page 100 (you are getting an almost 2% revenue increase of a $15 trillion economy from expiring EGTRRA (01) and JGTRRA (03):

[mawilson 2,133]

So?

2.7% of GDP is aproximately $3.7 trillion.

[웃 910]

So?

2.7% of GDP is aproximately $3.7 trillion.

2.7% of $15 trillion = $405 billion

http://www.google.co...&gs_sm=&gs_upl=

ETA: Is the following chart made up? If not, how can you want these tax cuts to remain in effect:

Is this made up?

Most of the Bush tax cuts were scheduled to expire after December 2010 but were continued for another two years in last December’s tax compromise. We added the cost of extending them from estimates prepared by CBO and JCT.[18] Together, the tax cuts account for $1.7 trillion in extra deficits in 2001 through 2008, and $3.7 trillion over the 2009-2019 period. Finally, we added the extra debt-service costs caused by the Bush-era tax cuts, amounting to more than $200 billion through 2008 and another $1.7 trillion over the 2009-2019 period — nearly $330 billion in 2019 alone.

Edited August 2, 2011 by Lord Infamous

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

2.7% of $15 trillion = $405 billion

http://www.google.com/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=2.7%25+of+15+trillion&btnG=Search&pbx=1&oq=&aq=&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=

Go get em LI! Don't let him try and bamboozle ya with that fancy shmancy shifty NYC city slicker talk.

[웃 910]

So?

2.7% of GDP is aproximately $3.7 trillion.

Someone used .27 instead of .027 when calculating

But if you mistakenly say we will save $3.7 trillion in a year (instead of $370 billion) and STILL SAY "SO WHAT" then I guess we should end this discussion now!

Edited August 2, 2011 by Lord Infamous

[luckytxn 2,265]

Does anyone think that just taking away the Bush tax cut on any making over 250 thousand will solve our problems?

[mawilson 2,133]

Someone used .27 instead of .027 when calculating

But if you mistakenly say we will save $3.7 trillion in a year (instead of $370 billion) and STILL SAY "SO WHAT" then I guess we should end this discussion now!

The numbers are over 10 years, not one.

2.7% of GDP times 10 years.

Edited August 2, 2011 by mawilson

[^_^ 5,021]

It will need to be allowed to expire for everyone. President Obama can't do that now but he can (I'm not saying he will) after he's re-elected. Elect a Republican and it's not going to happen until that President is in his or her (who am I kidding... his) 2nd term.

Oops

LI has established his supremacy. It's time for you to let him mate with your mistress.

[mawilson 2,133]

3.7 trillion over 10 years (370 billion per year)

700 billion over 10 years (70 billion per year)

I thought it was obvious.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Does anyone think that just taking away the Bush tax cut on any making over 250 thousand will solve our problems?

Nope...but if they got rid of those tax cuts, cut defense spending by a third, and left the middle east to whoever...it would be a start. Then send all the illegals out and build that wall. Problems for the most part would be solved....well some other changes also but I don't need the forums ban.

[mawilson 2,133]

LI has established his supremacy. It's time for you to let him mate with your mistress.

Not really.

[^_^ 5,021]

Not really.

Be a nice guy, let him have a nibble.

[웃 910]

The numbers are over 10 years, not one.

2.7% of GDP times 10 years.

2010 to 2012 is 10 years?

[luckytxn 2,265]

It will need to be allowed to expire for everyone. President Obama can't do that now but he can (I'm not saying he will) after he's re-elected. Elect a Republican and it's not going to happen until that President is in his or her (who am I kidding... his) 2nd term.

LI has established his supremacy. It's time for you to let him mate with your mistress.

Good to see where I was going. The tax cuts on just that narrow range is barely a drop in the bucket. It would establish a tax hike atmosphere to then go and let the whole Bush tax cuts expire.

The simple problem though is to just decrease spending to levels where we are fiscally sound.

[mawilson 2,133]

2010 to 2012 is 10 years?

The number I quoted ($3.7 trillion) was the cost of the Bush tax cuts over 10 years.

Why are you arguing with me? The numbers are indisputable.