The biggest political myth currently making its way in the media (besides the whole "liberal media" nonsense) is that somehow Republicans care about deficits and that allowing the Bush tax cuts for the top 1-2% to expire somehow reduces them. Obviously, they don't - on both counts. The Bush tax cuts of 2001 are the single greatest contributor to the deficit. The graph below shows that the Republican tax plan actually costs $36 billion more than the Democrats' plan. That's billion with a B.
5 comments:
"The Bush tax cuts of 2001 are the single greatest contributor to the deficit."
That is demonstrably false. It is the unfunded mandates and exorbitant spending started under Bush and acclerated to light speed levels under Obama that are the biggest contributors to the deficit and debt.
Remember that TRILLION dollar stimulus package that the Democrats and Obama passed? ($1 trillion is a little more than $36 billion, sir.)
Funny how you keep forgetting who was president from 2001-2009, my friend. The Bush tax cuts were in the trillions (2.4 trillion which doesn't count the additional interest we had to pay since the tax cuts were not paid for), and intellectually honest economists know that when you inherit a surplus, then give away all the money in it, you have less. Hence, the deficit. There were also the two wars that were not paid for, plus a new entitlement that was also not paid for. Add that to the financial collapse caused by the barely regulated financial sector (cuz regulations are for commies) and a housing bubble perpetuated by wrongheaded policies of the Bush administration.
Sorry, but the stimulus (1/3 of which was tax cuts) doesn't even come close.
I know it's fun to pretend all these deficits and bad economic times began with Obama, but factually, that is "demonstrably false". When Obama came into office, the Bush economy was losing 750,000 jobs a month, now there is job growth. Bush hid the true cost of the wars, now the wars are counted the way they should be.
The professional right may have collective amnesia, but the American public does not. Tax cuts for the wealthy do not create jobs or growth. Trickle down economics is a failure, and those who keep pushing it, are liars.
I would recommend reading this 2009 report called Before the Bush Recession: Supply Side Tax Cuts Failed to Deliver Jobs and Income Growth between 2001 and 2007. The report is a pdf, so if you don't have Adobe reader, it won't work. The facts are damning, and the Bush legacy restoration project the right is engaging in is all based on fantasy.
You must be kidding! Bush is definitely at fault for starting the mess, but Obama has only increased the problems by several orders of magnitude.
It is hilarious that you think Obama created any jobs. The few jobs he did create were largely in government, such as census workers.
Lastly, you might as well have given me research from Daily Kos instead of your pdf from the Center for American Progress. They are both similarly "objective" and "accurate".
Right but maybe something from the Heritage Foundation or AEI would be objective and accurate? Puh-lease!
I know the Center for American Progress is attacked daily by Glenn Beck, but that only re-enforces the accuracy of their findings to me.
It is a fact that more jobs were created in Carter's four years than in W's eight. The only thing we have seen since trickle down economics became the scam du jour from the GOP is greater income disparity between the extremely rich and the shrinking middle class. If one is not a millionaire or billionaire, supporting the GOP is like asking for your salary to stagnate, your savings to dwindle, and your job security to be minimal. Who would vote for that?
Post a Comment