The Liberals' Spending Delusions and the 2010 Elections

Reader Comments
Back to blog

...towards a ditch at full electric speed (35MPH) with no hands on the wheel because one hand is holding a 40 ounce "O.E.800" and the other is holding a crack pipe. With the gangsta rap loudly thumping and crackling through the crummy sound system, this soon-to-be wreck almost hurtles itself over a cliff when all of a sudden... its batteries die! Teetering there on the brink of assured destruction, suddenly the screaming occupants hear the sound of an unmuffled, gas-guzzling SUV approaching, full of tea-partiers. "Hooray, we be saved!" they all chortle, just before the SUV taps the electro-crap-mobile just enough to send it down to the jagged rocks and alligators below. And bummer! Just then I woke up and realized it was all just a dream!

Ford Man of MI 7:53PM October 27, 2010

Can't prove to someone who can not comprehend.
You think Juan Williams is a conservative after all. You think 40% + 50 % = 100 %. You are chump # 1 erased.
Enjoy Nov. 2.

Bill Hedges of MO 10:04PM October 26, 2010

Here is the BEA's data which you willfully ignore. This is because you are quite dishonest. In 2001, the year of the tax cuts, the federal government collected $1.25 trillion in all federal taxes. In 2008, the federal government collected just under $1.45 trillion in revenue; down from the previous year which peaked at $1.6 trillion. Even assuming these are inflation adjusted figures (most government data is) this amounts to less than a two percent average annual rate of growth of federal revenues; the lowest average in post WWII history!
http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=87&ViewSeries=NO&Java=no&Request3Place=N&3Place=N&FromView=YES&Freq=Year&FirstYear=2001&LastYear=2009&3Place=N&Update=Update&JavaBox=no
The tax cuts cost more than Obama's health care bill passed earlier this year.
"Newly revised estimates from Citizens for Tax Justice show that the Bush tax cuts cost almost $2.5 trillion over the decade after they were first enacted (2001-2010).1 Preliminary estimates from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office show that the House Democrats’ health care reform legislation is projected to cost $1 trillion over the decade after it would be enacted (2010-2019)."
http://www.ctj.org/pdf/bushtaxcutsvshealthcare.pdf
Bush's tax cuts delivered no new net private sector jobs and no real net federal revenue growth. The Bush years also had the slowest GDP growth rates since the late 1940s.
"...the 2001-2007 economic expansion was among the weakest since World War II with regard to overall economic growth. Moreover, revenue growth was very poor during 2001-2007. Real per-capita revenues fell deeply in 2001, 2002, and 2003 and have since risen to barely 2 percent above their 2001 level. Over the course of other postwar economic expansions, they grew by an average of 12 percent."
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=507
The GOP/TP call for further tax cuts for the rich to restart the economy will succeed no better than Bush's tax cuts for the rich; the top five percent of income earners received over half the tax cuts and there was record SLOW GDP growth. There was also a massive financial crisis. This is because trillions in revenues found its way back to the rich with no profitable outlet for investment other than financial speculation. The only REAL way forward is to tax idle wealth and create a new economy based on high paying green jobs that can't be outsourced.

steve of IL 8:52PM October 26, 2010

How could cutting taxes to rich increase the taxes paid by the rich. Make no sense to most on the left. I've been called many names for saying that, nuts being the cleanest.
About this time I will quote John F. Kennedy. Few on the left will say bad words about him. They will instead say rich paid high tax rates in his day:
"It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now ... Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus."
– John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962, president's news conference
More John F Kennedy quotes:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39517
My favorite Kennedy quote is:
"Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits… In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now."
For more proof of tax cuts for rich increases their taxes burden here go to this source:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/08/the-historical-lessons-of-lower-tax-rates
John F. Kennedy might be a TEA member today.
Now to big bad G.W. Bush. Man that stole Presidency from Al Gore in Florida. Left really hate him over that.
With recession occurring on Bush watch, left may put the blinders on and blame Bush for the financial bust using tax cuts to rich as cause. But CBO BLOWS that idea out of the water:
“According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Bush tax cuts actually shifted the total tax burden farther toward the rich so that in 2000-2004, total income tax paid by the top 40% of income-earners grew by 4.6% to 99.1% of the total“.
“This shift may have occurred because as the wealthy (who are arguably the most industrious and productive citizens) are better-incentivized to be industrious and productive through lower taxes, they create higher incomes for themselves and end up paying more taxes. The Bush tax cuts did shift the tax burden, but not in the direction most liberals think.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/lying_about_bushs_tax_cuts.html
I find most left will quote top 2% not 40%. That makes their point. Some will lie and say Bush cuts were only for rich. That is easily disprove. So won't go into now.
Most on Left denies tax cuts increases government revenue. To the person uneducated to the facts it appears they would be correct..
Things are not always as they seem...

Bill Hedges of MO 12:53PM October 26, 2010

How much carbon are Joe and Barrack spewing, along with their horse manure, as they jet around the country, 24/7?
Oh, by the way, who's been running the country for the past 3 weeks?

R.L. Schaefer of CA 12:37PM October 26, 2010