Conservatives tell us that cutting taxes will increase revenues

[BOSSHOG]

If they believe that is true then what would be the dynamic effect of having no taxes whatsoever? Like 40-eleven-trillion-zillion dollars dude! So how come the unwashed millions who make up the bush base don't insist that all taxes are done away with? Could it be because that is not what they have been taught to do! As usual, krugman sums it up very nicely:

http://www.topplebush.com/oped2415.shtml

Trickle down economics is as effective at generating revenues as keeping people who love each other from getting married will maintain the sanctity of marriage. Its as if one were waving a flag and telling the universe how patriotic he is and yet avoiding the recruiters office as if he had an anal cyst or a pending deferment; or some embarrassing shit in the closet. Oh to be a conservative!

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. didn't work under Reagan, won't work now

The richest people are the ones who benefit from the tax cuts that have been enacted, and they don't spend the money-they keep it, usually in accounts that don't help the economy, but only themselves.

[Daphne08]

2. I've been waiting since the early 80's for it to "trickle down"

this way.

[badgolfer]

3. Gov't Revenues

If lowering taxes for the ultra rich increases tax revenues for the Federal government, then why do the Republicans keep having to raise the debt limit? I believe they have raised it 7 or 8 times since Bush has been President.

[zalinda]

4. What's funny is

someone posted a recession and recovery chart and the Clinton years weren't on it. Apparently, we didn't have a recession with Clinton, go figure!!!!!!!

zalinda

[Warpy]

5. In conservative la la land, only cutting taxes on the richest

will increase revenues. The poorest have to be taxed into starvation, then they'll work harder.

The problem with this is that no rich man ever gave a poor man a job producing anything he didn't have a customer waiting for.

There is only so much that the rich can consume. They are choking off the economy by keeping us artificially poor and raising all the taxes on us they can, through OASDI, the AMT, sales taxes, state fees, and every other thing they can think of.

Regressive taxes may raise the revenues lost by giving the rich a free ride eventually, but they kill the economy.

We're about to find that out all over again.

[abluelady]

16. And even with a customer waiting

jobs are being cut so the bottom line looks good. We must keep our shareholders happy. :sarcasm:

[gulfcoastliberal]

6. What insanity.

We're headed towards something really ugly.

[daa]

7. They might belive that but we know better

IRS Argues That the Bush Tax Cuts Reduced Tax Revenues

The IRS Quarterly Statistics of Income Report has hundreds of pages of new numbers, but one well respected tax publication provides this summary:

The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts shrunk individual income tax revenues in 2003 despite a rise in taxable income and forced over 400,000 new taxpayers onto the rolls of the alternative minimum tax, according to IRS data released on December 21. The IRS’s latest Statistics of Income Bulletin showed total individual taxable income rising 2.5 percent to $4.2 trillion from 2002 to 2003. But despite the extra $90 million in taxable income in 2003, the IRS found that total individual income tax collected actually fell 6.1 percent to $748 billion as a result of the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (JGTRRA). “This was the third successive year that total income tax declined,” the report said. “The decline in total income tax for 2003 reflects the reduction in tax rates under JGTRRA.” Total revenue would have declined even further, the report found, had AMT revenues not conversely jumped 38.2 percent, with 23.4 percent more taxpayers paying the tax. “This is largely attributable to the decrease in ordinary tax rates due to JGTRRA, while the tax rates on alternative minimum taxable income remained the same as 2002,” the report said. “Over 0.4 million more taxpayers were required to pay the AMT for 2003.” … The IRS also found that a 23 percent jump in total capital gains and dividends income was responsible for a large portion of the 2003 increase in taxable income, with wage and salary income rising just 2 percent. Capital gains and dividends income received the largest tax rate cuts under JGTRRA, contributing to the decline in revenues. The IRS report found that all income classes but the lowest saw smaller average tax rates in 2003, but that higher-income groups received a much larger percentage tax cut. “The lower average rates for these higher-income returns not only reflect the decrease in tax rates on ordinary income but also a new preferential tax rate for certain qualified dividends and long-term capital gains sold after May 5, 2003, which were introduced in JGTRRA,” the report stated.

http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2005/12/irs-argues-that-bush-tax-cuts-reduced.html

[MissMarple]

8. "tax cut zombies...they just keep shambling forward,...hungry for more"

Great article. I read somewhere at the Brookings Institution web site that tax cuts only work in a very narrow window, and we usually miss it. www.brook.edu

"Here's how I see it: Republicans have turned into tax-cut zombies. They can't remember why they originally wanted to cut taxes, they can't explain how they plan to make up for the lost revenue, and they don't care. Instead, they just keep shambling forward, always hungry for more."

[meow2u3]

9. Cons also think starvation will make you fat

Con logic is :crazy:

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

10. Bush Sr. called supply side, or trickle down "Voodoo Economics!" before he

tried to implement them as President.

"...In 1980 Bush became Reagan's running mate despite earlier criticism of Reagan “voodoo economics” and by the 1984 election had won acclaim for his devotion to Reagan's conservative agenda..."

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0760625.html

[Yupster]

11. I think there's now plenty of evidence in

that Supply-side economics just hasn't worked.

However, your logic of saying if you want taxes cut why not cut them totally in debate is called something like "reduction al absurdium," (hey it's been 30 years) which means you take any argument to its extreme and it looks silly.

Just as good an example would be "hey if you people want the tax rate raised, why don't you raise it to 100 % then?" It's just as silly either way.

[TankLV]

12. Againa? This bullshit was proved crap long ago by Clinton & Democrats

during Clinton's 2 SUCCESSFUL terms of Peace Hope and Prosperity - especially comppared to Raygun's and both bush terms.

[rman]

13. It does increase revenues for the rich

If one looks at the numbers, it's clear that "trickle down" is having the opposite effect of what it was predicted to do 30 years ago. (see Krugman)

[formercia]

14. that's like saying that cutting my paycheck

and qualifying me for food stamps is going to increase my buying power.

[Sparkly]

15. They've been saying this for decades!!

It's incredible that they still peddle this same snake-oil. I used to wonder how many times they'd need to learn the same lesson, but they just don't see past their noses, so they've never learned it. (What national debt?) :mad:

[SillyGoose]

17. No nation has ever cut taxes during a time of war and we sure as

hell shouldn't even be entertaining the idea right now. Throw Katrina into the mix and its a recipe for disaster. This whole economic theory that Bush and the RWers are pushing is the most fiscally irresponsible and damaging thing they could be doing.

If we were dealing with Clinton's economy with no outside pressures on the economy and with a budget surplus then the RWers could debate the theory of trickle down economics. But implementing it now is nothing short of sheer lunacy. BTW, I don't support the trickle down theory, just pointing out that in a stable booming economy it would be more appropriate for them to float this type of economic plan.

[OneTwentyoNine]

18. Because they ALWAYS cut them for the wrong people....

Giving a Nazi like Rush Limbaugh who makes 20+ MILLION per year a big tax cut doesn't do JACK SHIT towards stimulating the economy. So...Rush does what,goes out and buys 1 plasma screen TV? BFD,if MEANINGFUL tax cuts were really targeted at the MILLIONS who really need them then the economy might get a bounce.

Bush tried this BS in 2001,didn't work then and the deficit has been piling up in record amounts since then.

[harpo]

19. that's the "trickle down effect" that was killed w/ Globalization

they thought that by giving the rich tax breaks, they would spend it creating jobs and hiring people...instead they are opening shops in China and paying .19 an hour :(