CBO Report 2005: In the absence of the Bush Tax Cuts the nation would be returning to a surplus in 2011

[dalegg 143]

It's not obvious at all, because it's not true.

I meant on a per individual basis.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It's not obvious at all, because it's not true.

True, the wealthy only got a minority (30 some odd percent) of the benefit. Since they only represent some 2% of the taxpayers, on a per taxpayer basis, it is very true that they reaped the largesse while the peasants were catching the crumbs. You know that, of course.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Because revenues were reduced while spending was increased by self-proclaimed fiscally responsible Republicans. Because fiscally responsible Republicans opted to start two wars w/o raising a dime for it, because those same fiscally responsible Republicans passed trillion dollar entitlement legislation w/o raising a single dime for it and because fiscally responsible Republicans built a huge new federal bureaucracy w/o ever raising a single dime to pay for it. Or, as then VP Cheney put it, because deficits don't matter. That's why.

No, STOP reducing revenues while increasing federal spending. That is basic economics and basic accounting that the Republicans are incapable of. And because they're incapable of understanding these simple principles of fiscal sanity, we're sitting on 14 trillion dollars of debt rather than being close to having any debt worth mentioning at all. But they are the fiscally responsible party.

Democrats had from January 07- January 2011 (especially January 2009 - January 2011) to make the changes you ask for.

Don't forget it.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

and why are we paying interest on anything? Why is the government in debt in the first place.

THAT should be the question that every red-blooded American should be asking.

Ok. I'll take this seriously.

From current time to the past - major conflicts. We dropped expensive bombs on Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, Korea, (here we made expensive bombs for no one), Japan, the Pacific, Europe, Africa, Europe.

Ok so now we are preflight, we fought Spanish Holdings, Mexico, Native Americans, Ourselves, Mexico, Britain, Britain.

Clearly the answer is we shouldn't fought Britain and gotten ourselves into debt to begin with. Then we would have had a nice queen, a national healthcare plan and...wait we'd be Canada....

Ah, Canada isn't half bad anyway.

[웃 910]

LI, I chose "It is unknown".

There is ongoing debate amongst economists about what the maximal point on the Laffer curve is, at which threshold revenues are at their greatest.

If that is true then how can the Bush Tax Cuts be "the single largest contributing factor to the deficit"? From what I have gathered it is fact that they were a failure. And it is fact that they catered to the rich. That is not up for debate (or so I thought).

Pre-Bush tax cuts - the CBO projected increasing surpluses at an increasing rate (with surpluses totaling $5.6 trillion by 2011). Post-Bush tax cuts - we got the opposite.

All these charts must be made up or skewed:

Figure 1 from 2004 which was a pretty bold prediction (-100 billion deficit to -400 billion deficit a couple years down the road)...

Even one you posted:

I take it as fact when The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities states that more than $500 billion of the 2009 deficit were due to the wars/Bush tax cuts. And another FACT when they say these 2 items will add over $7 trillion in deficits (2009-2019)..

They were right before (see 04 predictions) and they are right again...Ending the wars and bush tax cuts will remove $7 trillion in deficits over the next 8 years.

Now if mawilson or anyone else wants to answer...How can adding $7 trillion in deficits (09-19) be good for our economy....The country is fvcked, the middle and lower class is fvcked, and the top 20% (especially top 1%) are going to get even richer all the way down to our demise!

Edited August 2, 2011 by Lord Infamous

[one...two...tree 2,762]

they can tie it to a shooting star for all i care. they're still the obama tax cuts. good for you, planning ahead is the way to go. i've been doing fine living on 70% of my income for the last 9-10 years. my surplus has been divided 50/50 savings & retirement. i think washington needs to learn how to spend less than 100% of their income....it can be done

That's like saying FDR is no longer given credit for giving us Social Security since it was revamped by several later presidents.

[mawilson 2,133]

True, the wealthy only got a minority (30 some odd percent) of the benefit. Since they only represent some 2% of the taxpayers, on a per taxpayer basis, it is very true that they reaped the largesse while the peasants were catching the crumbs. You know that, of course.

The wealthy got to keep more of their own money, while the poor got tax credits paid for with someone else's money.

[SMOKE 1,426]

That's like saying FDR is no longer given credit for giving us Social Security since it was revamped by several later presidents.

no its not. the tax cuts were accepted by both parties & it was agreed they have an exact end date. obama caved & extended them...obama owns them.

Edited August 2, 2011 by SMOKE

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

That's like saying FDR is no longer given credit for giving us Social Security since it was revamped by several later presidents.

No doubt FDR presented the Ponzi scheme to bilk future generations out of their hard earned wages, but to the Greediest Generation, it sounded like found money. Old people have nobody but themselves to blame for bankrupting the nation.

Time for some tough love. Don't just tax rich people, tax old people.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

no its not. the tax cuts were accepted by both parties & it was agreed they have an exact end date. obama caved & extended them...obama owns them.

Look back on landmark pieces of legislation over the past century, from Teddy Roosevelt's Anti-Trust laws, to Clinton's, Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy. The history books commonly refer them to whichever presidents or members in Congress who either authored it or made it their personal fight. Hillary Clinton will forever be tied to the failed Health Care Reform bill during her husband's presidency. What you are talking about is who shares the responsibility and yes, Obama now shares responsibility because he made the concession to extend the Bush Tax Cuts, however, he did so against his own desire to end them, as a compromise to get congressional Republicans to agree to extending unemployment benefits. So to be more accurate, that's like twisting someone's arm until they say they like brussel sprouts even though they don't really like them. To insist that Obama truly wanted to extend the Bush Tax Cuts or that he believes they have been beneficial to the economy is not being intellectually honest and I'm pretty sure you know that.

ETA: You think the Bush Tax Cuts have been beneficial to this country?

Edited August 2, 2011 by DFH

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

No doubt FDR presented the Ponzi scheme to bilk future generations out of their hard earned wages, but to the Greediest Generation, it sounded like found money. Old people have nobody but themselves to blame for bankrupting the nation.

Time for some tough love. Don't just tax rich people, tax old people.

This post is just silly.

[SMOKE 1,426]

To insist that Obama truly wanted to extend the Bush Tax Cuts or that he believes they have been beneficial to the economy is not being intellectually honest and I'm pretty sure you know that.

ETA: You think the Bush Tax Cuts have been beneficial to this country?

i didn't say that. where did you read that?. it depends on perspective imo. the better off..yes. the less fortunate..no. me..i couldn't tell you, i haven't put pen & paper to the taxes & my personal position. no matter what my tax rate is, i will always pay what i'm required to pay & do my best to provide for my family.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

The Bush tax cuts expired. Obama extended them until 2013. Dems are happy...right? Dems voted fr Obama nad will do it again next year...right?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

This post is just silly.

Do you pay FICA?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Do you pay FICA?

I do. Would there have been a problem had the trust been raided countless times?