Tax Cuts and Job Growth: They're Just Not That Into Each Other

[Troubadour]

It is still Bush's fault.

Bush ran up 8 years worth of debt. You expect that to be paid off in three years with no new revenue and zero interest rates?

You people are completely nuts.

They aren't nuts, they're just sociopaths. They lie and say irrational things not because they believe them, but because it serves their desire for power. It's like an animal instinct for them. They'll claim 2 + 2 = 5 if it gets them another tax cut. There is no point - literally no point - at which they would admit being wrong: They would just pursue an increasingly deranged and nonsensical set of rationalizations for why up is down. So they will never, ever admit that President Obama has done a good job cleaning up their mess - they won't even admit they left him a mess, or that the policies their candidate is supporting are the same ones that created it. They just say whatever they think is most damaging to him politically. And given how pathetic most of what they say is, it's a pretty strong indicator of how desperate they are.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Bam Bam ain't doing so hot either.

He don't want to hear that.

Its all still Bush's fault and will be till the day Barry and his posse hit the road.

It is still Bush's fault.

Bush ran up 8 years worth of debt. You expect that to be paid off in three years with no new revenue and zero interest rates?

You people are completely nuts.

Seriously.

The point is none of it was paid off and in fact the debt was effectively doubled.

As I said the fucking government is not a responsible steward of our money. Never has been and never will be.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Jared Bernstein: Tax Cuts and Job Growth: They're Just Not That Into Each Other

The three policy ideas I hear most often for greater job creation are cut taxes, cut regulation, and more education. While I support the latter, especially for those whose access is blocked by income constraints, none of these ideas will do much to increase the quantity of jobs.

What will? Greater consumer demand, an end to deleveraging, a growing housing market, more domestic production of the goods we consume, new innovations that generate hungry, job-creating start-ups financed by now-idle capital, clean energy investment, and if all else fails, a national program to rebuild and repair the nation's infrastructure, from roads to schools.

Boom...there's your jobs program. And I can think of policies that go along with each one of the above--in order: consumer demand: stimulus; housing: loan mods and principal reduction for some, time for others; more domestic production: weaker dollar, smaller trade deficits, manufacturing policies; innovation/start-ups: R&D, public/pvt/academic partnerships; infrastructure: FAST!

Yup!

So you're advocating ballooning the national debt and hiking inflation. Doesn't sound like a very bright plan to me. Also comes down to a massive transfer of wealth from the middle class to the rich.

Not necessarily.......

*​

April 20, 2012

Bush Tax-Cuts Expire = Bigger Tax-Cut​

"Republicans work from a base line that includes a full extension of the Bush tax cuts. The Democrats’ base line assumes the expiration of the tax cuts for families earning more than $250,000. The Congressional Budget Office uses yet another base line, one that assumes that all of the Bush tax cuts will expire, because that’s what current law says will happen at the end of 2012. The difference in revenue between the Republican and the current-law scenario exceeds $4 trillion over 10 years.

So before we can even discuss what a new tax code should look like, we somehow need to resolve the most polarizing question in American politics: Should taxes be higher or lower?

It’s extremely unlikely that the two parties will come to an agreement on their own. Luckily, they don’t have to. If they simply continue to disagree, at the end of this year the Bush tax cuts will expire, and two of the competing base lines will fade away, leaving only the CBO’s standing.

Some Republican staff members say that, though they oppose this outcome, it would actually make tax reform easier by enabling both parties to sell reform as a huge tax cut that reverses the expiration of most of the Bush tax cuts.

Here’s why: Using the Republican base line that assumes all of the Bush tax cuts are extended, President Obama’s plan amounts to a $1.5 trillion tax increase. But using a base line in which all of the Bush tax cuts have expired, a tax reform plan that hits the same revenue target as Obama’s amounts to a $2.5 trillion tax cut. Neat, huh?

That’s not just a PR point: Tax reform would, in that scenario, actually be a huge tax cut because, after expiration, taxes really would have reverted to a much higher level.

Reality is always more compelling than base lines. The two parties would still have to settle on a final revenue number, but at least they could agree on one that would cut taxes on almost all Americans.

Which highlights another reason that letting the Bush tax cuts expire might lead to tax reform: Their sudden withdrawal would be so calamitous to the economy, and so embarrassing to Washington, that the crisis could force the two parties to fast-track a reform plan, saving most taxpayers from feeling the bite of Washington’s failure.

It’s sad to think that the only way to save the tax code might be to let it collapse at the end of the year. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true."