Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Cost of Tax Cuts for the Wealthiest Americans Since 2001

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
WildNovember Donating Member (726 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 04:31 AM
Original message
Cost of Tax Cuts for the Wealthiest Americans Since 2001
Edited on Sat Nov-26-11 04:36 AM by WildNovember
Money lost to the U.S. Treasury due to tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans,
enacted by President Bush and extended by President Obama.

Cost of Tax Cuts for Top 5%: $1.04 trillion

For the top 1%: $715.9 billion


Running totals of cost at link (totals keep changing, like those war death sites)

http://costoftaxcuts.com/


What about Corporate Taxes?

The official marginal tax rate for corporations is 35 percent. However, in 2010 corporations paid, on average, just 23 percent of their profits in taxes, after deductions, credits and loopholes.

According to the Commerce Department and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, corporate profits have grown as a share of national income since 1934, while wages and salaries have declined.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 04:56 AM
Response to Original message
1. Cost of Wars Since 2001
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WildNovember Donating Member (726 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 05:06 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Wow -- tax cuts for the rich running a close race with war.
Edited on Sat Nov-26-11 05:08 AM by WildNovember
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #2
17. The tax cuts exceed the cost of the wars.
That is, if you include all the tax cuts: Federal income tax for everyone, not just for the wealthy; inheritance tax; capital gains and dividend taxes.

I believe every single one of these tax cuts needed to expire before we started cutting any social program.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #1
12. $1.28 trillion.
That number is almost too painful to look at.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. The major causes of our deficits are abundantly clear.
And the solutions are just as clear: End the Bush/Obama tax cuts and end all funding for the Bush/Obama wars. But our corrupt government wants to instead balance the books on the backs of the sick, elderly, and poor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam11111 Donating Member (638 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 05:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. 1981 TRICKLEDOWN idea began cutting taxes. how much has it cost in Revenue since '81?
That is the relevant stat to be talking about IMO.

17 Trillion is my estimate - any academic estimate out there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 05:34 AM
Response to Original message
4. Historical debt in 09/30/2001: 5,807,463,412,200.06
Edited on Sat Nov-26-11 05:37 AM by dkf
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm

Nov 16, 2011 1:02pm
U.S. Debt Tops $15 Trillion Mark Today

Don’t look now, members of the “supercommittee” battling the national debt, but the amount the U.S. owes topped the $15 trillion mark Wednesday afternoon.

The deficit has ballooned to nearly $48,000 for every man, woman and child in the U.S. This year alone, the U.S. will spend $1.3 trillion more than it takes in.

The debt has expanded at an alarming pace, from $7.5 trillion in 2004 and $5.6 trillion in 2000. At the current rate, Debtclock.org reckons that the debt will top $23 trillion in 2015, though the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office puts the estimate at $17.6 trillion.
Back in August after a protracted fight, Congress voted to raised the national-debt ceiling by $2.7 trillion to $17 trillion, while requiring $2.7 trillion in deficit reduction by 2021.

Compared with other developed nations, the U.S. has a debt to GDP ratio of 85 percent, compared with Germany  at 74 percent and Japan at a whopping 194 percent. World debt clocks can be found here.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

 http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2011/11/u-s-debt-will-top-15-trillion-mark-today/

So George Bush's taxes and wars were a little over $2 trillion. Maybe the rest is overspending huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WildNovember Donating Member (726 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 05:45 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Gee, I wonder why Japan hasn't collapsed since their debt is 194% of GDP.
Unless you want a stationary economy, you want some amount of debt. At least under the economic system we have. And the biggest single chunk of it owed to Americans for their own Social Security payments. BFD.

Bush's tax cuts cut $2 trillion in TEN YEARS.

The total US debt is about $15 trillion & that's for the entire history of the US, with the single largest chunk being due to the ongoing (three years and counting) recession (decreased revenues and the necessity of spending to avoid collapse) plus the tax cuts and the war.

There have been very few years in the history of America that were debt-free, or in which a balanced budget was run. And those there were were followed quickly by Depression -- such as the Bush Depression which followed the Clinton "balanced budget".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 05:54 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Kyle Bass says Japan is next.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WildNovember Donating Member (726 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 06:01 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Most of Japan's debt is owed to its own people. If they're "next" we'll know why.
The people pushing this programme are murderers. literally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. It's their demographics that work against them which he explains.
Declining numbers buying Japanese bonds will be their problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 05:45 AM
Response to Original message
6. Imagine that - the same amount of debt we need to cut
Would make 1 think the "Unfunded Tax Cuts" caused the whole Debt problem
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norrin Radd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 05:55 AM
Response to Original message
8. kr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
B Calm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
10. E-mailed this link to all my right wing buddies
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 08:19 AM
Response to Original message
11. Now that corporations are persons ...
why isn't Obama ordering the IRS to require them to file personal income tax returns?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TBF Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
13. Here's a graphic version that I found earlier this month -
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libinnyandia Donating Member (526 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-26-11 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
14. Obama extended them so unemployment benefits could be
extended. He won't do it again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. What was the logic in doing so before that doesn't equally apply now?
We are in little less need for those benefits now, certainly not enough less to change the calculus, particularly in an election year.

If he won't now then what was the justification for doing it before and vice versa.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libinnyandia Donating Member (526 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. He had to compromise but now feels the GOP won't compromise
now that they control the House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 11:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC