Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    Boy we could have really used that dough to build some super battleships to cruise the Rio Grande and stopped those migrant children from invading the Good Old U.S. of A.. The Good Old U.S. of A. the beacon of freedom, prosperity and the most compassionate country in the history of Man .

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    Heh, heh, heh ... it would be funny if the sarcasm wasn't so dang spot-on.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    Wow, be careful, you may pull a muscle with such a S T R E T C H.... 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hingmarsh. Show Hingmarsh's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    Wow, be careful, you may pull a muscle with such a S T R E T C H.... 

     

     




    How is it a stretch to say that personal income tax cuts reduce the amount of personal income tax revenue? From there it's simple math to figure out how much the reduction was.

     

    No the title is as presented.  David Cay Johnston did this "analysis" in an article here:http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/7/economy-bush-taxcutsgrowthjobs.html.  He comes up with this 6.6 Trillion loss of income but never says HOW the tax cuts reduced the income that much, just that it did.  If you read the comments and his response to them, he basically saying it must be right because the Bush campaign stated flatly that no outside influences would ever change the resulting prosperity.   So it HAD to be the cuts.

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

     

    The general idea is that lowering tax rates encourages profit taking by businesses which in turn encourages a short-term horizon in business thinking. If profits are taxed at a low rate then the incentive for business is to take these immediate profits rather than invest in the long-term growth and expansion of the business.

    If taxes were higher then that would make reinvesting the profits back into the business more attractive and would reward long-term business horizons that maximized growth over profits.

    The other corrollation is that the driving force of capitalism is profit, not necessarily building and expanding a business nor the general welfare of the country. The business is just a vehicle by which to accumulate wealth, whether it takes place here in the US or in China. If the tax schedule made manufacturing overseas cost prohibitive, those companies would stay or move to the US.

    The overarching, or maybe overreaching, premise is that the tax cuts encouraged business to take short-term profits out of the company rather than making long-term invetments. The tax structure also encourages business to take the path of least tax to maximize short-term profits.

    I don't necessarily agree with all that but the thesis does have some merit.

    A longer explanation can be found here:

    http://real-economics.blogspot.com/2014/07/democrats-struggle-to-understand-how.html

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

     


    Wow, be careful, you may pull a muscle with such a S T R E T C H.... 


     




    How is it a stretch to say that personal income tax cuts reduce the amount of personal income tax revenue? From there it's simple math to figure out how much the reduction was.

     




    It is absolutely not simple math. Tax cuts help the private sector economy to free itself from its Government shackles.  Reagan cut taxes by a third, and tax revenues increased dramatically and the economy went on an historic boom.  The Bush tax cuts resulted in increased revenue as well, though they didnt "pay for themselves" (as if we have to pay the Almighty Government back for our own money...)

    Liberals want to raise taxes because they love big government. They will tell you that lower tax rates accomplish nothing, but government spending will. Wrong as usual.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to Hingmarsh's comment:


    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:
    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:


    Wow, be careful, you may pull a muscle with such a S T R E T C H....

    How is it a stretch to say that personal income tax cuts reduce the amount of personal income tax revenue? From there it's simple math to figure out how much the reduction was.


     


    No the title is as presented.  David Cay Johnston did this "analysis" in an article here:http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/7/economy-bush-taxcutsgrowthjobs.html" rel="nofollow">http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/7/economy-bush-taxcutsgrowthjobs.html 


    He comes up with this 6.6 Trillion loss of income but never says HOW the tax cuts reduced the income that much, just that it did.  If you read the comments and his response to them, he basically saying it must be right because the Bush campaign stated flatly that no outside influences would ever change the resulting prosperity.   So it HAD to be the cuts.





    No, What he actually said is that IF Bush is correct and no outside influences would change the resulting prosperity of the tax cuts then the tax cuts are a pivot point on the axis of personal wealth, and it is at that point that personal wealth began to decline, so it must be the tax cuts that were responsible ... if Bush was correct in his campaign rhetoric ... and the diffrence between where the line was moving and where it ended up is $6.6 trillion of lowered personal wealth.


    Just as if that line had shot upward, the wingnuts would be trumpeting the tax cut as the reason, so too must they expalin why that personal wealth line fell dramatically immediately after the tax cuts.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

     

     

    Wow, be careful, you may pull a muscle with such a S T R E T C H.... 

     

     




    How is it a stretch to say that personal income tax cuts reduce the amount of personal income tax revenue? From there it's simple math to figure out how much the reduction was.

     




    It is absolutely not simple math. Tax cuts help the private sector economy to free itself from its Government shackles.  Reagan cut taxes by a third, and tax revenues increased dramatically and the economy went on an historic boom.  The Bush tax cuts resulted in increased revenue as well, though they didnt "pay for themselves" (as if we have to pay the Almighty Government back for our own money...)

    Liberals want to raise taxes because they love big government. They will tell you that lower tax rates accomplish nothing, but government spending will. Wrong as usual.



    Oh geepers, this derp again....

    Ronnie raygun's tax cut, by every standard benchmark, lowered federal tax revenues dramatically.

    In constant dollars:

    1980   1309.5
    1981   1366
    1982   1309.7
    1983   1213.5
    1984   1290.3
    1985   1376.1
    1986   1404.3

    As a share of GDP:

    1980   18.5
    1981   19.1
    1982   18.6
    1983   17.0
    1984   16.9
    1985   17.2
    1986   17.0

    It always amazes how desperately you cling to this rhetoric when even the architects and champions of the cause have long abadoned it as pure rhetorical bs.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hingmarsh. Show Hingmarsh's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

     

    No the title is as presented.  David Cay Johnston did this "analysis" in an article here:http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/7/economy-bush-taxcutsgrowthjobs.html" rel="nofollow">http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/7/economy-bush-taxcutsgrowthjobs.html 

     

    He comes up with this 6.6 Trillion loss of income but never says HOW the tax cuts reduced the income that much, just that it did.  If you read the comments and his response to them, he basically saying it must be right because the Bush campaign stated flatly that no outside influences would ever change the resulting prosperity.   So it HAD to be the cuts.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    No, What he actually said is that IF Bush is correct and no outside influences would change the resulting prosperity of the tax cuts then the tax cuts are a pivot point on the axis of personal wealth and it is at that point that personal wealth began to decline, so it must be the tax cuts that were responsible ... if Bush was correct in his campaign rhetoric ... and the diffrence between where the line was moving and where it ended up is $6.6 trillion of lowered personal wealth.

    [/QUOTE]

    A distinction without a difference.  He compared the "results" to the campaign rhetoric and concluded the decline in income was due to the tax cuts.   He never offered an explanation of HOW the tax cuts reduced income or even explored the probability that the campaign was wrong and what other possible reasons and outside influences could have contributed.  Not much of an "analysis".

     

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hingmarsh. Show Hingmarsh's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    Well, I don't have the time to dig down right now. If it's accurate that the source never crunched the numbers, then it's silly/dishonest to arrive at any particular amount.

     

    What is clear, however, is that two things had a significant impact on tax revenue:

     

    - Tax Cuts

     

    - Economic disaster from two burst bubbles

     

    [/QUOTE]

    He did some number crunching, but no real analysis. It's his conclusion that I find a little ridiculous given he offered no explanation as to how the tax cuts caused the decline in income.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    The title... you mean personal income tax, right?

     

    Not just income?


    http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/7/economy-bush-taxcutsgrowthjobs.html

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to Hingmarsh's comment:


     


    No the title is as presented.  David Cay Johnston did this "analysis" in an article


    He comes up with this 6.6 Trillion loss of income but never says HOW the tax cuts reduced the income that much, just that it did.  If you read the comments and his response to them, he basically saying it must be right because the Bush campaign stated flatly that no outside influences would ever change the resulting prosperity.   So it HAD to be the cuts.



    No, What he actually said is that IF Bush is correct and no outside influences would change the resulting prosperity of the tax cuts then the tax cuts are a pivot point on the axis of personal wealth and it is at that point that personal wealth began to decline, so it must be the tax cuts that were responsible ... if Bush was correct in his campaign rhetoric ... and the diffrence between where the line was moving and where it ended up is $6.6 trillion of lowered personal wealth.



    A distinction without a difference.  He compared the "results" to the campaign rhetoric and concluded the decline in income was due to the tax cuts.   He never offered an explanation of HOW the tax cuts reduced income or even explored the probability that the campaign was wrong and what other possible reasons and outside influences could have contributed.  Not much of an "analysis".



     


    There is quite a distinction, this was an analysis of the campaign's claim in support of the tax cuts.


    "...the Bush tax cuts failed to produce the promised result."


    The Bush campaign rhetoric never presented any numbers or analysis to buttress their claims ... it was all taken on face value... that personal wealth would increase and no outside influence would alter that trajectory.


    So just as if the personal wealth line had shot upward, the wingnuts would be trumpeting the tax cut as the reason, so too must they expalin why that personal wealth line fell dramatically immediately after the tax cuts.


     


     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    Well, it sounds like whatever he did, it was pointless and foolish.

     

    Personal income tax cuts don't reduce personal income. That doesn't begin to make sense. Instead, they reduce personal income tax revenue.



    Right; the very idea of letting those who lawfully earned their income, keep their property, is one abhorrent to every liberal. The insatiable appetite of the Almighty Government must be satisfied!

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:



     

     

     

     

     

     

    He doesn't so much as suggest a reason for how an income tax cut caused income to decline and conducts absolutely no analysis of that particular question.

     

    All he's doing is looking at average reported income plotted against years, and then declaring that "Americans went along, congressional Democrats joined Republicans to enact the tax cuts, and now we know the results." His excuse is that Bush promised that tax cuts would mean more prosperity.

     

     

     

    What Bush said is irrelevant to the question. One would need a tremendous study with all sorts of controls to try to figure out the impact of tax cuts on income.

     

    This is the sort of two-factor claim I usually criticize the CLCs for.




    I was trying to give you the answer to your question that you asked me about personal income tax and not just personal income . What I read it appears that the gentleman who penned the analysis used personal income tax information over a period of 12 years to come to his conclusion .

    My premise of starting this discussion was to point out how preposterous the treatment of the migrant children is .

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

    Boy we could have really used that dough to build some super battleships to cruise the Rio Grande and stopped those migrant children from invading the Good Old U.S. of A.. The Good Old U.S. of A. the beacon of freedom, prosperity and the most compassionate country in the history of Man .



    Well, cutting taxes doesn't cut personal income, it increases it, I.e., you aren't forking over as much to government.

    it is possible, though not likely, that it would reduce revenue to the government.  

    Is that what you mean?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    The title... you mean personal income tax, right?

     

    Not just income?


    http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/7/economy-bush-taxcutsgrowthjobs.html" rel="nofollow">http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/7/economy-bush-taxcutsgrowthjobs.html



    ALjazeera is your source? Well, that's your first problem.

    the second problem is the analysis contained within the article. It is illogical to the extreme.  

    The key problem I see in the analysis is equating dropping personal incomes with lower tax rates.  I mean, think about that. That's not even possible.  On the one hand you are indicating that the individual personal income went up by lowering the tax, then on the other hand, the personal income dropped due to allowing the individual to keep more of their own money.  Completely illogical.  I would be looking for other factors.

    likely that the downturn of the economy, increased unemployment, 911, two wars, all probably had an impact, but any economist will tell you that cutting taxes doesn't lower incomes.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    Stop reporting my post, RRF

     



    I'm not. I like you.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    Could be the dumbest post ever.


     


    The relationship between tax rates, income, GDP, taxable events, tax revenues to the government is far too complicated and has too many variables for any such irrational claims.


     


     Really, one of the dumbest posts ever

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    In response to WhatNowDoYouWant's comment:

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

     

     

    Wow, be careful, you may pull a muscle with such a S T R E T C H.... 

     

     




    How is it a stretch to say that personal income tax cuts reduce the amount of personal income tax revenue? From there it's simple math to figure out how much the reduction was.

     




    It is absolutely not simple math. Tax cuts help the private sector economy to free itself from its Government shackles.  Reagan cut taxes by a third, and tax revenues increased dramatically and the economy went on an historic boom.  The Bush tax cuts resulted in increased revenue as well, though they didnt "pay for themselves" (as if we have to pay the Almighty Government back for our own money...)

    Liberals want to raise taxes because they love big government. They will tell you that lower tax rates accomplish nothing, but government spending will. Wrong as usual.



    Reagan enacted the largest tax increase in history.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

    Could be the dumbest post ever.

     

     

     

    The relationship between tax rates, income, GDP, taxable events, tax revenues to the government is far too complicated and has too many variables for any such irrational claims.

     

     

     

     Really, one of the dumbest posts ever



    Basically he's blaming the financial collapse on the bush tax cuts.  Kind of a stretch.  But, the Bush tax cuts dramatically decreased rates on dividends more than in regular income.  One way to increase the dividend in the near term is to not make capital investments.  But, not making capital investments will reduce profits in the long term and certainly slow the rate of growth in income - capital investments mean increases in productivity which means increases in income.  So he's exaggerating, but he does have a point.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:



    ALjazeera is your source? Well, that's your first problem.

    the second problem is the analysis contained within the article. It is illogical to the extreme.  

    The key problem I see in the analysis is equating dropping personal incomes with lower tax rates.  I mean, think about that. That's not even possible.  On the one hand you are indicating that the individual personal income went up by lowering the tax, then on the other hand, the personal income dropped due to allowing the individual to keep more of their own money.  Completely illogical.  I would be looking for other factors.

    likely that the downturn of the economy, increased unemployment, 911, two wars, all probably had an impact, but any economist will tell you that cutting taxes doesn't lower incomes.

    are you really suggesting an economic downturn and increased unemployment caused the loss in income?  Might the economic downturn, increased unemployment, and lower income all be the same thing?  

      If the tax cut was accompanied by cuts in government spending, then the tax cut has 0 impact on income.  Sure, the income of the people receiving the tax cut benefit, but the people who were affected by the cuts in government spending lose income by the exact same amount.

    if the tax cuts were not matched by cuts in gov spending, then the theory is that the borrowing by the govt required to cover the tax cuts results in lower investments, and lower productivity, and lower incomes.  This is the argument against Keynes, but you knew that I'm sure.

    but in reality, the loss in income was caused by .... The collapse of our banking system.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from high-road. Show high-road's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:


    Could be the dumbest post ever.


    The relationship between tax rates, income, GDP, taxable events, tax revenues to the government is far too complicated and has too many variables for any such irrational claims.




    And yet the wingnuts, in their constant effort to dupe the low information voters, constantly try to draw a straight line between tax cuts and blissful economic conditions ... except when all that promised prosperity fails to materialize ... then they're at a loss to explain why.


    Go figure....


     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:



    ALjazeera is your source? Well, that's your first problem.

    the second problem is the analysis contained within the article. It is illogical to the extreme.  

    The key problem I see in the analysis is equating dropping personal incomes with lower tax rates.  I mean, think about that. That's not even possible.  On the one hand you are indicating that the individual personal income went up by lowering the tax, then on the other hand, the personal income dropped due to allowing the individual to keep more of their own money.  Completely illogical.  I would be looking for other factors.

    likely that the downturn of the economy, increased unemployment, 911, two wars, all probably had an impact, but any economist will tell you that cutting taxes doesn't lower incomes.

    are you really suggesting an economic downturn and increased unemployment caused the loss in income?  Might the economic downturn, increased unemployment, and lower income all be the same thing?  

      If the tax cut was accompanied by cuts in government spending, then the tax cut has 0 impact on income.  Sure, the income of the people receiving the tax cut benefit, but the people who were affected by the cuts in government spending lose income by the exact same amount.

    if the tax cuts were not matched by cuts in gov spending, then the theory is that the borrowing by the govt required to cover the tax cuts results in lower investments, and lower productivity, and lower incomes.  This is the argument against Keynes, but you knew that I'm sure.

    but in reality, the loss in income was caused by .... The collapse of our banking system.



    Am I suggesting it is the economic downturn? No, I'm telling you it is the economic downturn that is lowering incomes.

    the idea that cutting my taxes lowers my income is insane. It allows me to keep more money in my pocket.  That it is a labor market that favors employers is what lowers wages.  That and shipping in a new underclass from South America.

    Now, let's move from the microeconomic to the macroeconomic.

    This concept that tax cuts must be paid for is rubbish. Socialist/progressive doublespeak.

    As far as Keynes: You don't understand what Keynes was proposing.  Keynes only proposed short term debt, which is your example, to stimulate the economy.  Keynes thought long term debt was destructive to an economy, and agreed with Hayek on this principle.  He told Hayek this  to his face, this is no intellectual supposition.

    We are in a twenty to thirty year cycle of excessive government spending.  This is not Keynes, this is something else. It is called destroying the economy.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: Bush Tax Cuts wiped out 6.6 Trillion Dollars in personal income .

    In response to high-road's comment:

    In response to Hansoribrother's comment:

     

     

    Could be the dumbest post ever.

     

    The relationship between tax rates, income, GDP, taxable events, tax revenues to the government is far too complicated and has too many variables for any such irrational claims.

     

     



    And yet the wingnuts, in their constant effort to dupe the low information voters, constantly try to draw a straight line between tax cuts and blissful economic conditions ... except when all that promised prosperity fails to materialize ... then they're at a loss to explain why.

     

     

    Go figure....

     

     



    No, it is not that hard.

    what is hard to understand is why the progressives think that government is the hub of economic principle, not the market, and why externalities seem to be invisible to them, like an economic downturn having something to do with it.

    it is like they are trying to convince people that the problem is that they don't pay high enough taxes. Hmmm......

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share