Save America: Lower Taxes Now

[rdean]

Folks make it sound like the only thing of economic consequence that occurred in the 80's was the Reagan tax cuts, and that all economic results can be explained by the tax cuts. That is wrong.

Oil prices fell from $35 a barrel down to 10, giving a big boost to the economy, probably bigger than the tax cuts. The reduction in energy prices was a function of increased exploration caused by the higher price (initially) and reduced demand caused by the mandatory fuel efficiency standards for the auto makers.

In 1981, IBM rolled out the first business personal computer, which unleashed a wave of productivity by putting spreadsheet, database and word processing technology in the hands of everyone. Rooms filled with 40 draftsmen were replaced with 4 drafters with AutoCAD.

Whatever happened in the 80's, it was a function of many big factors in addition to the tax policy.

Reagan did quadruple the US deficit during his 8 years, taking total US debt up from 700 billion to 2.8 trillion by the time he left office.

Don't let facts get in the way of the Republican solution for everything - tax cuts.

 

[Big Fitz]

Folks make it sound like the only thing of economic consequence that occurred in the 80's was the Reagan tax cuts, and that all economic results can be explained by the tax cuts. That is wrong.

Oil prices fell from $35 a barrel down to 10, giving a big boost to the economy, probably bigger than the tax cuts. The reduction in energy prices was a function of increased exploration caused by the higher price (initially) and reduced demand caused by the mandatory fuel efficiency standards for the auto makers.

In 1981, IBM rolled out the first business personal computer, which unleashed a wave of productivity by putting spreadsheet, database and word processing technology in the hands of everyone. Rooms filled with 40 draftsmen were replaced with 4 drafters with AutoCAD.

Whatever happened in the 80's, it was a function of many big factors in addition to the tax policy.

Reagan did quadruple the US deficit during his 8 years, taking total US debt up from 700 billion to 2.8 trillion by the time he left office.

Don't let facts get in the way of the Republican solution for everything - tax cuts.

Actually that's half the process... the other part is SPENDING CUTS YOU DUMBASS!

 

[antagon]

keep it real, fitz. when have republicans cut spending, huh? its just tax cut conservatism. nobody's buying any bogus contracts with america anymore.

 

[loosecannon]

our tax system's relationship with growth is tenuous. i argue that rather than the rate, that the method and structure of our taxation has the most influence.

You may be right, esp since the rate , by rights, must be dictated by spending.

 

[loosecannon]

Folks make it sound like the only thing of economic consequence that occurred in the 80's was the Reagan tax cuts, and that all economic results can be explained by the tax cuts. That is wrong.

Absolutely correct.

Oil prices fell from $35 a barrel down to 10, giving a big boost to the economy, probably bigger than the tax cuts. The reduction in energy prices was a function of increased exploration caused by the higher price (initially) and reduced demand caused by the mandatory fuel efficiency standards for the auto makers.

In 1981, IBM rolled out the first business personal computer, which unleashed a wave of productivity by putting spreadsheet, database and word processing technology in the hands of everyone. Rooms filled with 40 draftsmen were replaced with 4 drafters with AutoCAD.

Whatever happened in the 80's, it was a function of many big factors in addition to the tax policy.

Reagan did quadruple the US deficit during his 8 years, taking total US debt up from 700 billion to 2.8 trillion by the time he left office.

THE big thing that happened in the late 70's/early 80's was a nearly 50% depreciation of the dollar in about 5-6 years.

IOW a correction. Once the correction was absorbed the economy recovered and soared.

Since then economic policy has shifted into this BS trance in which we try to correct recessions without absorbing the painful correction (which is usually inflation/wage reduction).

Recessions are necessary events like common colds that force you to make adjustments to imbalances that irrational exuberance would never allow.

We need to get back in the practice of paying the piper, taxing as much as we spend, not stealing our prosperity from the future.

Pay as you go.

 

[antagon]

our tax system's relationship with growth is tenuous. i argue that rather than the rate, that the method and structure of our taxation has the most influence.

You may be right, esp since the rate , by rights, must be dictated by spending.

if only fiscal responsibility were so easy. instead, there are structural and methodological approaches which have to be taken to shore up that end of the budget as well. cutting budgets wont work by itself.

 

[loosecannon]

our tax system's relationship with growth is tenuous. i argue that rather than the rate, that the method and structure of our taxation has the most influence.

You may be right, esp since the rate , by rights, must be dictated by spending.

if only fiscal responsibility were so easy. instead, there are structural and methodological approaches which have to be taken to shore up that end of the budget as well. cutting budgets wont work by itself.

That wasn't what I was saying. I agreed with you that the method of taxation may have big effects on the economic outcome.

but i have seen to much to trust either Congress or the prez with the power to enact deficit spending without the kind of super majorities required to pass amendments.

 

[Big Fitz]

keep it real, fitz. when have republicans cut spending, huh? its just tax cut conservatism. nobody's buying any bogus contracts with america anymore.

Huh... I seem to recall that when the Contract With America came up with Clinton's original outrageous budgets, they had to do government shutdowns because they refused to pay for it. After that, the budgets got much more reasonable, and the deficit started shrinking.

Crazy how that works... isn't it?

Oh and what about welfare reform?

 

[jeffrockit]

and that while tax rates are reduced, actual tax revenues increase.

This sentence is absolutely crap and a lie.....

But I have to agree with the general premise that in the face of globalization America needs to eliminate the corporate tax entirely.

But as long as we have a deficit that is outta hand and a debt that quickly approaches 100%of GDP we have to increase personal taxes.

sorry that's just the way it is and no amount of phony assertions about revenues increasing when personal taxes were cut is gonna change it.

revenues have almost always increased yoy. And just because they increased after a tax cut in no way at all proves that the tax cut caused the revenue increase.

Correlation doesn't equal causation. It just doesn't.

You are completely wrong and here are the facts refuting you claim:

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.

DWYER: Bush tax cuts boosted federal revenue - Washington Times

 

[asterism]

Folks make it sound like the only thing of economic consequence that occurred in the 80's was the Reagan tax cuts, and that all economic results can be explained by the tax cuts. That is wrong.

Absolutely correct.

Oil prices fell from $35 a barrel down to 10, giving a big boost to the economy, probably bigger than the tax cuts. The reduction in energy prices was a function of increased exploration caused by the higher price (initially) and reduced demand caused by the mandatory fuel efficiency standards for the auto makers.

In 1981, IBM rolled out the first business personal computer, which unleashed a wave of productivity by putting spreadsheet, database and word processing technology in the hands of everyone. Rooms filled with 40 draftsmen were replaced with 4 drafters with AutoCAD.

Whatever happened in the 80's, it was a function of many big factors in addition to the tax policy.

Reagan did quadruple the US deficit during his 8 years, taking total US debt up from 700 billion to 2.8 trillion by the time he left office.

THE big thing that happened in the late 70's/early 80's was a nearly 50% depreciation of the dollar in about 5-6 years.

IOW a correction. Once the correction was absorbed the economy recovered and soared.

Since then economic policy has shifted into this BS trance in which we try to correct recessions without absorbing the painful correction (which is usually inflation/wage reduction).

Recessions are necessary events like common colds that force you to make adjustments to imbalances that irrational exuberance would never allow.

We need to get back in the practice of paying the piper, taxing as much as we spend, not stealing our prosperity from the future.

Pay as you go.

Good points, but how about we spend as much as we tax instead?

That'll get more charts about how Bush was wrong and I agree. However the answer is not accelerated debt.

 

[asterism]

keep it real, fitz. when have republicans cut spending, huh? its just tax cut conservatism. nobody's buying any bogus contracts with america anymore.

Huh... I seem to recall that when the Contract With America came up with Clinton's original outrageous budgets, they had to do government shutdowns because they refused to pay for it. After that, the budgets got much more reasonable, and the deficit started shrinking.

Crazy how that works... isn't it?

Oh and what about welfare reform?

Yeah, but an unsustainable situation is still unsustainable. The GOP deserves the blame for fucking that all up. It set the stage for this clusterfuck we've got now. Liberals will always overspend, that's to be expected. The GOP sold out a sustainable policy in 2002 by convincing the opposition that the public didn't care much.

Of course the fiscal conservatives do now, but it's a little late.

I don't want a single Republican who voted for that in office. Fat chance of any of that happening, but it's time for something different. Fiscal liberals need to go.

 

[antagon]

You may be right, esp since the rate , by rights, must be dictated by spending.

if only fiscal responsibility were so easy. instead, there are structural and methodological approaches which have to be taken to shore up that end of the budget as well. cutting budgets wont work by itself.

That wasn't what I was saying. I agreed with you that the method of taxation may have big effects on the economic outcome.

but i have seen to much to trust either Congress or the prez with the power to enact deficit spending without the kind of super majorities required to pass amendments.

no, i got the drift from your original post. there's no BBA or anything like it. 'emergency' is just a flick of the wrist away.

 

[Big Fitz]

The GOP deserves the blame for fucking that all up.

The GOP did forget what they were doing from 2002-2006. But the real damage under W happened after Pelosi took power, and the GOP played nice with the whole 50/50 bullshit. I remember Jumping Jim Jeffords who screwed the GOP and this nation . Regardless, they didn't do enough because they followed W's lead on 'bridge buiding' and gave the libs precisely what they wanted with NCLB and Medicare Part D. Massive mistakes.

Of course the fiscal conservatives do now, but it's a little late.

If, come 2012, the fiscal conservatives that are voted into power over the next 2 elections do not repeal Obamacare, Medicare Part D, and start putting the government out of the charity business... they will be fooked in 2014 as the GOP was due to their big government republican attitude from 2002-2006.

Fiscal liberals need to go.

I would love to see a new set of crimes based at targetting legislators for doing things knowingly against the constitution. There's too little punishment for legislators behaving badly. And fiscal irresponsibility is a biggy.

 

[antagon]

keep it real, fitz. when have republicans cut spending, huh? its just tax cut conservatism. nobody's buying any bogus contracts with america anymore.

Huh... I seem to recall that when the Contract With America came up with Clinton's original outrageous budgets, they had to do government shutdowns because they refused to pay for it. After that, the budgets got much more reasonable, and the deficit started shrinking.

Crazy how that works... isn't it?

Oh and what about welfare reform?

i think that you've confused political posturing with conservatism, hook, line and sinker.

the issue of budget responsibility was top billing since 92. welfare reform was inevitable since the early 80's and there was bipartisan support for the passage of the 'workfare bill'. the contract turned out to be a disappointment for me in that it failed to enact an act or amendment emplacing structural conservatism in our system. the following republican controlled government did not impress with fiscal conservatism, despite many of the same faces in office. popular social conservatism and costly neo-conservatism dominated the GOP agenda, crowding out the fiscal and regulatory conservatives. the president's veto pen was the scarcest in history.

the president does not make and pass legislation but they set the theme for the government. the theme set by republicans with bush and reagan in his latter years was not a fiscally conservative one, leaving GHWB as the last conservative minded president to come from their ranks.