besides adding massively to the national debt, what else did bush's tax cuts do?

[thereisnospoon]

I really don't see anything positive that came from it

This is a troll thread.
Sit down and listen...
George W Bush was a big spending populist.
During his first campaign for President he made it very clear that he would run down the middle.
Soon after he took office the mainstream media accused Bush of "stealing democrat issues"...\Bush was a bog spender on social programs. Yet the democrats fought him at every turn. The reason is simple, democrats were frightened to see a well liked politician with an (R) after his name take their issues and successfully run with them.
Bush left office after his second term with a budget deficit less than ONE THIRD the size of Obama's mess. Obama's people throw the word "trillion" around like it was a mere drop in the bucket.
DO you have any clue the magnitude of the number " one trillion"?
Some perspective...
One trillion seconds is almost 3,200 years....I will spell it out for effect..THREE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED YEARS.....Get it?
That means if the government printed one one dollar bill per second it would take 3,200 years to print one trillion one dollar bills....And you lefties have the balls to say what Obama is doing is just dandy. Bullshit.. You people are all bullshit. Your side gets called on Obama's out of control nation bankrupting spending and you offer the pat excuse; "Bush did it".....You libs will never change. You take credit for things when they go well, but never accept responsibility when things go poorly.

 

[bripat9643]

is all I can really say if that's what you got out of that.

What I got is that you, like all libs, have the moral code of a thief.

 

[bripat9643]

Right...It's being forced from us, at gunpoint if necessary.

No taxation without representation doesn't mean no taxation. Noone's forcing you to live in the Country that the Founder's designed where the Citizenry forcibly pay for the infrastructure, law enforcement and security. But they did design it this way.

So it's voluntary because you can get the hell out of the country if you object? Al Capone said the same thing about anyone competing against him in the liquor business.

Liberals are thugs. That's what you are making explicit.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I really don't see anything positive that came from it

I have a great idea! How about you name this thread "Bush was the only, only President of the United States, and he's responsible for every single itsy-bitsy financial ill that we ever have been or will be faced with!!! And, and and I really really hate Bush!"

Pretty accurate?

Since I don't read your history lessons anymore, I'll only say that there is no denying that Obama didn't create an economic mess all by himself, ergo the reason the policies of the Bush Administration are so frequently made a part of the discussion. Obama inherited much of it from Bush, then had to deal with his own set of economic nightmares. Let's just stick with those two, shall we?

You don't set the parameters of the discussion.
FACT, Bush was a big social spender. The fact that the Left ignores that when they screech about Bush creating the deficits that exist now is a two pronged pile of nonsense.
Fact, Obama has spent us into deficit oblivion. The ten year projected shortfall is equal to the entire net worth of the entire country...That's every nickel owned by every person in the United States...You're ok with that? Why, because Obama is a democrat? Please. Shed the jersey and start thinking for yourself.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I really don't see anything positive that came from it

They seem to have annoyed you to the point that you lie about them, I think that is positive.

 

[Truthseeker420]

People keeping more of what's yours to begin with isn't positive?

BTW, only spending money you don't have adds debt.

I'm sorry giving the rich a free ride isn't "keeping more of what's yours ".


If you don't have gas money to get to work do you quit your job or borrow money?

 

[Truthseeker420]

Ask Obama and the Dem Senate what was so good about the Bush tax cuts, they passed it again...

ummm because the GOP threatened to not extend unemployment for working Americans which would have been disaster for our economy.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I really don't see anything positive that came from it

Assured that wages would become stagnant, among other things. I find cons walk away from a thread whenever I post this analysis, based on 2008 IRS tables.

tax.com: So How Did the Bush Tax Cuts Work Out for the Economy?

I find liberals hate it when their pet theories and falsification of data is challenged.


According to the IRS gross tax collections went from $2.1 trillion in 2001 to $2.7 trillion in 2007. There was a slight drop in collections for the first 2 years after the tax cuts, and then it rose steadily. If people were actually earning less after taxes than they were before the tax cuts doesn't that actually prove that the government got more money?

The thing is, your source used AGI for his figures, and then argued that a lower AGI meant people were investing less money. It actually means just the opposite because AGI is the number you get after you take away investments and all the other things that the IRS allows you to deduct before you figure out how much you owe. The guy is supposedly a tax expert, he should know that. I hope you are not using him for your taxes, he is probably robbing you blind.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/histab18.xls

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I have a great idea! How about you name this thread "Bush was the only, only President of the United States, and he's responsible for every single itsy-bitsy financial ill that we ever have been or will be faced with!!! And, and and I really really hate Bush!"

Pretty accurate?

Since I don't read your history lessons anymore, I'll only say that there is no denying that Obama didn't create an economic mess all by himself, ergo the reason the policies of the Bush Administration are so frequently made a part of the discussion. Obama inherited much of it from Bush, then had to deal with his own set of economic nightmares. Let's just stick with those two, shall we?

This is a joke, right?

You actually used to be sensible, perhaps you should go back to my 'history lessons...'

You certainly need something to ground you in reality.


"Obama has repeatedly claimed that his budget would cut the deficit by half by the end of his term. But as Heritage analyst Brian Riedl has pointed out, given that Obama has already helped quadruple the deficit with his stimulus package, pledging to halve it by 2013 is hardly ambitious. The Washington Post has a great graphic which helps put President Obama’s budget deficits in context of President Bush’s."
Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

OK...not history lesson....how about an English lesson:

quadruple: Four times as much in size, strength, number, or amount.
A fourfold amount or number.
To multiply or be multiplied by four: quadrupled the order; quadrupled in size.
quadruple - definition of quadruple by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Be fair now.

Obama's budget actually does reduce the deficit by half. Two years after he gets out of office the deficit for that year will be half what it is projected to be the last year he is in office. The minor detail that that last years budget is four times larger than when he came in is just you and me being petty.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

People keeping more of what's yours to begin with isn't positive?

BTW, only spending money you don't have adds debt.

Let's say you make $50K a year and spend $60K a year. Sure cutting back on spending reduces your debt-no question.

But explain to me how making $55K a year, while still spending $60K doesn't.

Raising revenue also reduces debt (unless spending is also increased of course).

No. It. Does. Not.

Let me see if you can follow some simple math. You have been spending $60,000 dollars for ten years, and were only making $50,000 that entire time. Your debt is now $100,000 plus interest.

You get a raise, and are now making $55,000 a year. You still spend $60,000 dollars a year because your idiot brother in law told you that increasing revenue reduces debt. At the end of 10 years you owe an additional $50,000, the original $100,000, and compounded interest in the total. You raise did not decrease your debt in the slightest. The only way to decrease your debt is actually cut your spending to a level where you can put money toward paying it down.

By the way, if we want to actually make this about the government, they make $50,000 a year, spend $60,000 the first year, and increase spending every year by $5000 a year to get out of debt. At the end of 10 years they are $385,000 in debt, and are spending $60,000. They then try to hit you up for a raise to $55,000 a year, and promise you that they will spend even more money by increasing their spending at a rate of $10,000 a year because they get an additional $5,000.

How long will it take them to reduce the debt like that?

 

[Truthseeker420]

Fox News falsely claimed Obama budget "4x bigger than Bush's costliest plan"

During the April 3 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom, on-screen text repeatedly falsely claimed that President Obama's $3.6 trillion fiscal year 2010 budget is "4x bigger than Bush's costliest plan." However, President Bush submitted a $3.1 trillion budget for FY 2009. For FY 2008, Bush submitted a $2.9 trillion budget.

Fox News falsely claimed Obama budget "4x bigger than Bush's costliest plan" | Media Matters for America

 

[rdean]

besides adding massively to the national debt, what else did bush's tax cuts do?

Funded the movement of millions of jobs to China.

Nope, that was Clinton's.

Millions of jobs that were moved to China was funded by Clinton's tax cuts?

Man, when you guys rewrite history, you go all out. I keep telling Democrats that they need to lie the way Republicans do, but then no one would respect them. Then I realize why the Republican base hates government. Because their leaders have no respect. I think it's partly because all their policies fail for one. Oh, and because they lie, just like their base.

I don't know. Maybe the Republicans don't know that "rewriting history" IS lying. I thought they were all "Gawdly" and stuff. Lying was supposed to be a no-no. Some kind of commandment. Some are still saying that Obama took a trip costing 200 million dollars a day.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm sorry giving the rich a free ride isn't "keeping more of what's yours ".


If you don't have gas money to get to work do you quit your job or borrow money?

Tax cuts are giving anyone a "free ride." The top 1% pay 50% of all income taxes. How is that a "free ride?"

You assume government does something productive. 90% of the money it gets is flushed down the toilet, or it even harms the economy.

 

[editec]

It made the world a better place for billionaires, didn't it?

EVery policy ccreates winners and losers.

The rich won, and the nation as a whole lost.

 

[Oddball]

People keeping more of what's yours to begin with isn't positive?

BTW, only spending money you don't have adds debt.

I'm sorry giving the rich a free ride isn't "keeping more of what's yours ".


If you don't have gas money to get to work do you quit your job or borrow money?

Me keeping what's mine "gives" me nothing.

 

[thereisnospoon]

People keeping more of what's yours to begin with isn't positive?

BTW, only spending money you don't have adds debt.

I'm sorry giving the rich a free ride isn't "keeping more of what's yours ".


If you don't have gas money to get to work do you quit your job or borrow money?

Another head in the sand liberal exhibits his uncanny ability to spout non-sequiturs.
You evaded the question in it's entirety.
Clearly, with your lack of a logical response to the question, it is possible you agree with the confiscation of all wealth and subsequent redistribution by government as it sees fit.
I challenge you to debate that issue.
Sidebars and deflective commentary is not accepted.
Now, a direct answer is needed. Or your silence is due.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Maybe if your representatives made people pay for every nickel of government spending they passed, when they passed it,

people would stop asking their representatives for more government spending.

The ability to borrow is the root cause of the deficit/debt problem.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Maybe if your representatives made people pay for every nickel of government spending they passed, when they passed it,

people would stop asking their representatives for more government spending.

The ability to borrow is the root cause of the deficit/debt problem.

Spot on my man, spot on.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Right...It's being forced from us, at gunpoint if necessary.

Of course the difference between gubmint and a common street thug is that the mugger doesn't have tools like you pimping for him.

Taxes are in the constitution.

Duties, imposts and excises are in the original, not an unapportioned income tax.

So now the amendment process is illegitimate?

lol

 

[Oddball]

"The original" means prior to 1913, nitwit.