GWB tax cuts = largest revenue growth to follow in history

[SniperFire]

Obama has added 4.1 million jobs since 2009.

Owebama will be the first ever POTUS to inflict a net job loss on America.

 

[Mr. H.]

There was a sunset clause in the so-called Bush tax cuts.
They should be allowed to set.

Some may call that insanity. They could have included a sanity clause, but we all know he doesn't really exist.

 

[Chris]

Obama has added 4.1 million jobs since 2009.

Owebama will be the first ever POTUS to inflict a net job loss on America.

10,000 Americans a day are retiring.

Next.

 

[Chris]

Without the super committee, the spending cuts start automatically in January of 2013.

When the Bush tax cuts expire in December of 2012, Obama won't allow them to be renewed.

Spending cuts + a return to the old tax rates = deficit reduction.

Congress has been taken out of the equation. No treasonous Tea Party/Republicans to mess things up.

Another brilliant move by Obama.

 

[SniperFire]

The Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest five percent of Americans cost the U.S. Treasury $11.6 million every hour.

Bush tax cuts brought record Federal tax receipts into the Treasury in both 2006 and 2007 - exactly as planned before the unrelated credit bubble burst.

In fact, such tax cuts worked to grow the tax base in each and every instance it has been tried from Coolidge to Bush.

 

[Darkwind]

A belief that government is entitled to an income is one of the greatest fallacies perpetrated on the citizens since the ratification of the 16th Amendment. Today, it is often asked, "How can we pay for these tax cuts?". In fact, tax cuts do not need to be paid for simply because the government is required to live within its means. This, simply stated, means that if taxes are lowered, then government MUST cut spending to match the reduced income; unless the lowered taxes bring more tax receipts to the treasury.

An increase in tax revenues from increased business activity offsets and cancels any perceived losses that could have been collected from the tax cuts.

Additionally, deficits are caused by spending beyond the means of income.. Borrowing to finance budgets beyond the income level accrued is a multiplier to debt, thereby causing it to increase in a compounded manner.

 

[SniperFire]

Obama has added 4.1 million jobs since 2009.

Owebama will be the first ever POTUS to inflict a net job loss on America.

Next.

Facts, as they say, are a real mofo.

 

[Chris]

Owebama will be the first ever POTUS to inflict a net job loss on America.

Next.

Facts, as they say, are a real mofo.

10,000 Americans a day are retiring.

Next.

 

[SniperFire]

A belief that government is entitled to an income is one of the greatest fallacies perpetrated on the citizens since the ratification of the 16th Amendment.

America grew explosively in our first 150 years, when government spending accounted for less than 5% of GDP.

Now the gubmint swallows 40% or so of GDP.

 

[Chris]

A belief that government is entitled to an income is one of the greatest fallacies perpetrated on the citizens since the ratification of the 16th Amendment. Today, it is often asked, "How can we pay for these tax cuts?". In fact, tax cuts do not need to be paid for simply because the government is required to live within its means. This, simply stated, means that if taxes are lowered, then government MUST cut spending to match the reduced income; unless the lowered taxes bring more tax receipts to the treasury.

An increase in tax revenues from increased business activity offsets and cancels any perceived losses that could have been collected from the tax cuts.

Additionally, deficits are caused by spending beyond the means of income.. Borrowing to finance budgets beyond the income level accrued is a multiplier to debt, thereby causing it to increase in a compounded manner.

Borrowing was necessary to save the country from a deflationary spiral.

The stimulus worked.

 

[SniperFire]

Next.

Facts, as they say, are a real mofo.

10,000 Americans a day are retiring.

Next.

Approximately 11,000 babies are born every day in the US.

How Many Babies are Born every day in US


You are overmatched.

 

[uscitizen]

DWYER: Bush tax cuts boosted federal revenue - Washington Times
But the real jolt for tax-cutting opponents was that the 03 Bush tax cuts also generated a massive increase in federal tax receipts. From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. According to the Treasury Department, individual and corporate income tax receipts were up 40 percent in the three years following the Bush tax cuts. And (bonus) the rich paid an even higher percentage of the total tax burden than they had at any time in at least the previous 40 years. This was news to theNew York Times, whose astonished editorial board could only describe the gains as a “surprise windfall.”

Lose jobs
lose wall street wealth
you lose taxable income
Not Tax Policy as this was proved as well as job growth until the credit bubble busted



You wonder why BHO has ignored those jobs in this jobless recovery?

Not really a surprise.

Tax cuts stimulate business growth. Business growth turns into more revenues and more revenues means more taxes.

I is astonishing that the economy grew all through Bushes term, but the economy began to sicken and die when Democrats were elected in 2006. By the end of Bushes term, the Democrats has managed to destroy 5 solid years of growth. We still haven't recovered from their mismanagement of government to this day.

Growth? Junk mortgages? Housing bubble is growth?

Increased wages is growth.
Improved infrastructure is growth.
INcreases in non retail or govt jobs is real growth.

Only idiots would blame this all on the Dems.
Yes they played a part but no larger than the repubs did.
And this problem was building ever since Reagan proved the defecit did not matter and the US kept hemmoraging jobs overseas.

 

[Darkwind]

The backdrop to this report is an economy that is still facing a significant jobs deficit. During the Great Recession, the US lost more than 8.84 million private sector jobs, and to date has only managed to reduce that deficit by 1.26 million. Fully 13.9 million workers are still unemployed, nearly half of them for more than six months. Job creation, then, is still an urgent and immediate need for our economy.

At the same time, given that the last 12 months saw a net gain of more than a million jobs, it is important to begin to track the emerging recovery. We find the following:

In the private sector, there is a striking imbalance between where the recession’s job losses occurred, and where the growth of the past 12 months was concentrated:

• Lower-wage industries constituted 23 percent of job loss, but fully 49 percent of recent growth
• Mid-wage industries constituted 36 percent of job loss, and 37 percent of recent growth
• Higher-wage industries constituted 40 percent of job loss, but only 14 percent of recent growth

The current recovery looks worse than the “jobless” recovery of the 2001 recession, on several fronts:

• After a year of positive job growth, the private sector after the 2001 recession had recovered almost half (47 percent) of the jobs it had lost. By contrast, to date the private sector has recovered only 14 percent of the jobs it lost during 2008 and 2009.
• The early job growth following the 2001 recession was more balanced than the early job growth following the 2008 recession, with significantly more growth in higher-wage industries.

• http://nelp.3cdn.net/35f827759654da7a74_0am6bt3s5.pdf

 

[SniperFire]

After the Bush administration tax cuts, there were 52 months of continuous job creation and economic expansion.

52 months of job creation and expansion is the largest such period in American history

 

[Darkwind]

A belief that government is entitled to an income is one of the greatest fallacies perpetrated on the citizens since the ratification of the 16th Amendment. Today, it is often asked, "How can we pay for these tax cuts?". In fact, tax cuts do not need to be paid for simply because the government is required to live within its means. This, simply stated, means that if taxes are lowered, then government MUST cut spending to match the reduced income; unless the lowered taxes bring more tax receipts to the treasury.

An increase in tax revenues from increased business activity offsets and cancels any perceived losses that could have been collected from the tax cuts.

Additionally, deficits are caused by spending beyond the means of income.. Borrowing to finance budgets beyond the income level accrued is a multiplier to debt, thereby causing it to increase in a compounded manner.

Borrowing was necessary to save the country from a deflationary spiral.

The stimulus worked.

There is no proof that the stimulus worked, only speculation. The country would have recovered without the borrowing, and likely sooner than it has to date.

 

[Darkwind]

DWYER: Bush tax cuts boosted federal revenue - Washington Times
But the real jolt for tax-cutting opponents was that the 03 Bush tax cuts also generated a massive increase in federal tax receipts. From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. According to the Treasury Department, individual and corporate income tax receipts were up 40 percent in the three years following the Bush tax cuts. And (bonus) the rich paid an even higher percentage of the total tax burden than they had at any time in at least the previous 40 years. This was news to theNew York Times, whose astonished editorial board could only describe the gains as a “surprise windfall.”

Lose jobs
lose wall street wealth
you lose taxable income
Not Tax Policy as this was proved as well as job growth until the credit bubble busted



You wonder why BHO has ignored those jobs in this jobless recovery?

Not really a surprise.

Tax cuts stimulate business growth. Business growth turns into more revenues and more revenues means more taxes.

I is astonishing that the economy grew all through Bushes term, but the economy began to sicken and die when Democrats were elected in 2006. By the end of Bushes term, the Democrats has managed to destroy 5 solid years of growth. We still haven't recovered from their mismanagement of government to this day.

Growth? Junk mortgages? Housing bubble is growth?

Increased wages is growth.
Improved infrastructure is growth.
INcreases in non retail or govt jobs is real growth.

Only idiots would blame this all on the Dems.
Yes they played a part but no larger than the repubs did.
And this problem was building ever since Reagan proved the defecit did not matter and the US kept hemmoraging jobs overseas.

You cherry pick one sector and then lay claim that it is the entire economy, and then have the gall to call Me an idiot?

Yes, Bush has some blame, but lets remember something. Until 2007, the economy had worked its way back from the Clinton recession and the attack of 9/11/01.

Lets also remember who controls the purse strings in this country. I'll give you a hint. It isn't the President.

Regan did NOT prove the deficit did not matter. He simply used a deficit to eliminate a massive and continuing economy pressure on the United States. You know, that one thing that the Government IS authorized to spend money on?

 

[Interpol]

It's a fallacy to say that tax cuts pay for themselves. They don't. President Bush didn't pay for his tax cuts, and that's $4 trillion right there.

America is a growing country, so tax receipts should go up rather than down much of the time. In the next 5 years, tax receipts will be upwards of $3 trillion/year.

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

It's true that tax receipts hit record levels for about a 4 year period after the Bush Tax Cuts, but that was all part of the building of a massive housing bubble that was a cornerstone of President Bush, who campaigned on wanting to get every American their own house.

It was a bubble being built on the back of money being spent that was borrowed, either from credit companies or, in the previous administration's policy, from China and Japan and others, since his admin never paid for his tax cuts, as well as for his Medicare benefit.

No discussion about the debt and spending should take place without this useful chart.

No fiscal conservative can look at the Bush years as a good time. It's a phoney baloney, fuzzy math era with massive budget deficits that aren't even included in the official tallies because the two wars were never put on the books since President Bush always passed it as emergency appropriations a couple or so times every year (the neo-cons were afraid that if we saw the actual price tag in addition to the deficits we were already running, that we would not support the wars, which is probably true).

New spending under Obama consists almost entirely of his stimulus, while the rest of it is continued Bush spending (with fiscal year 2009 being the worst one ever, which was passed months before this President took office).

That tax receipts were up for the period of 2004-07 may make some people want to revise history, but it was a phoney bubble being created by policies coming from folks who I had thought would be fiscal conservatives, but ended up being fiscal liberals.

What we got out of it was the gutting of the manufacturing industry, and the rise of a service-oriented economy, which is nothing to be proud of.

Anybody who blames Obama exclusively has their head up their ass. Out of the last $10 trillion spent, more than 75% of it is from the failed policies of a man I supported in 2000 who ended up with the most liberal spending record in American history.

 

[SniperFire]

It's a fallacy to say that tax cuts pay for themselves. They don't.

During a time of shrinking or stagnant tax revenue, Coolidge cut taxes and the result was record Federal tax receipts.

During a time of shrinking or stagnant tax revenue, JFK cut taxes and the result was record Federal tax receipts.

During a time of shrinking or stagnant tax revenue, Reagan cut taxes and the result was record Federal tax receipts.

During a time of shrinking tax revenue, Bush cut taxes and the result was record Federal tax receipts.


In fact, it happened every fucking time it was tried.

 

[Ariux]

DWYER: Bush tax cuts boosted federal revenue - Washington Times

Lying GOP neocoons.

Notice the dip in federal revenues in Bush's first term in office, a large part of that was the Bush tax cuts, which reduced IRS collections. It wasn't until near the end of Bush's second term that revenues returned to what they were before Bush took office. By that time, some of those tax cuts had been eaten up by inflation (e.g. the increased child tax credit, hasn't been increased since).

Revenues dipped again in Obama's first year, but that big increase in federal spending that accompanied Obama's arrival in office was heavily pushed by GWB and McCain, as -haha- an economic stimulus.

BTW, also notice the revenue dip during the Reagan years.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

DWYER: Bush tax cuts boosted federal revenue - Washington Times
But the real jolt for tax-cutting opponents was that the 03 Bush tax cuts also generated a massive increase in federal tax receipts. From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. According to the Treasury Department, individual and corporate income tax receipts were up 40 percent in the three years following the Bush tax cuts. And (bonus) the rich paid an even higher percentage of the total tax burden than they had at any time in at least the previous 40 years. This was news to theNew York Times, whose astonished editorial board could only describe the gains as a “surprise windfall.”

Lose jobs
lose wall street wealth
you lose taxable income
Not Tax Policy as this was proved as well as job growth until the credit bubble busted



You wonder why BHO has ignored those jobs in this jobless recovery?

And yet Wages were essentially stagnant and this is a consumer spending based economy.
Andf even with such growth in revenues Bush still overspent by around 5 trillion.

Not really anything to be proud of.

And yet wages didn't stay stagnant. I'm sure you're quoting some sort of mythological talking point that minions like yourself are constantly buying.