General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGothmog
(145,241 posts)Kansas and the US found that the tax cut fairy does not exist
FSogol
(45,485 posts)KansDem
(28,498 posts)Reagan's lowering of taxes on the wealthy would free up money that would be reinvested in the American economy creating American jobs.
It was all horseshit and the f*cking Republicans knew it.
MadDAsHell
(2,067 posts)They put out long-term projections about Medicare when it was created; it was only a handful of years before its costs were exceeding those estimates by many, MANY multiples.
They have no idea what they're doing when they "project" these things; it's a joke. They'll say whatever it takes...
lame54
(35,290 posts)Senator Brownback
wolfie001
(2,231 posts)lame54
(35,290 posts)not sure what i was thinking
Scuba
(53,475 posts)lastlib
(23,233 posts)...not expecting any reply, of course:
When the economy was good before you took office, you said we needed to give tax cuts to rich people and corporations to keep it going. We did it, and the economy nosedived. Now, when the economy is bad, you say we need to give more tax cuts to rich people and corporations to revive it.
Is this the only economic idea you have? If it is, we are in trouble, because it never works.
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)ProfessorGAC
(65,042 posts)I thought a big reason the debt went up so much over the last 7 years was because the Obama administration started counting the war costs on the books.
If the deficits were kept artificially low because of off-budget war costs, the debt increase had to be kept artificially low. Either that or some very odd accounting practices are in play.
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)lpbk2713
(42,757 posts)ngGale
(2,080 posts)taught me this lesson when I was young. When I finally turned 21 my vote went for Carter and I never looked back.Worked in the medical field, Repub policies always hurt the poor and middle class.
NRaleighLiberal
(60,014 posts)For their greed, hypocrisy, blatant lies and distortions, and use of religion and scare tactics for control.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)What was supposed to pay off the debt was the projected surplus, the same projected surplus that Clinton was touting.
Bush, unlike some others, actually did NOT claim the tax cuts would pay for themselves. He claimed that they would USE part of the surplus.
Here's one radio address even after the campaign (I remember him using the same analogy during the campaign.)
https://web.archive.org/web/20010407014804/http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/02/20010224.html
"Finally, along with funding our priorities and paying down debt, my plan returns about one out of every four dollars of the surplus to the American taxpayers, who created the surplus in the first place. A surplus in tax revenue, after all, means that taxpayers have been overcharged. And usually when you've been overcharged, you expect to get something back."
In 2000, supposedly the tax cuts did NOT have to pay for themselves, because we had this projected surplus. I mean it was so huge. $5.6 trillion. It was much larger than the projected costs of the Bush tax cuts.
Too bad Clinton was NOT using his bully pulpit to tell us it was not real. At least Broder, conservative curmudgeon that he is, tried http://cjonline.com/stories/091400/opi_broder14.shtml#.VoL_c1JSDds