Why the Paul Ryan Budget Won’t Fly

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Friend Hedges, the problem with your statistics is they have no corelaton to today. No, the tax cuts did not have anything to do with the home mortgage crisis, but the crisis (the GREAT RECESSION)did result in high unemployment. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but when you have high unemployment, tax revenues go down, when you have high uenmployment, spending goes up (because of unemployment insurance).
Theoretically, if low taxes cause tax revenues to go up, then no taxes should be even better! Even you would have to admit at some point there is a point of diminishing returns. That's just logic.
The problem with my Pub friends is they think low taxes are the panacea for every economic problem. Remember Friend Hedges when the Pubs used to say the only time they would raise taxes was in times of war and economic distress? They don't say that anymore. Were they wrong then or are they wrong now?
Here's the problem with your historical tax revenue stats, 1) They don't take in to account something called The GREAT RECESSION 2) They don't take in to account 3 wars (I include war on terror) 3) They don't take in to account high unemployment. 4) and they don't take in to account 3 wars, a GREAT RECESSION and high unemployment all happening at the same time! Historical economic data proves one thing, for that time period those rates worked.
What will be interesting is stats from the last couple of years, when tax rates are at historical lows. If you're correct, despite high unemployment, two wars and the GREAT RECESSION, tax revenues will still increase. Sorry friend Hedges, under those circumstances, I'm highly skeptical.
The other problem my Pub friends have is this, they think they are in the majority and whatever they say should be the rule. I deal in political reality. Cry and whine all you want, you will never get the Dems to just cut all that spending (radical spending cuts) without raising any taxes, Not going to happen. So instead of crying about how everything should be your way and your way only, a little compromise would be a better policy. With compromise you might actually get something done. So go ahead and be obstinate if you want, but to do so means the debt is just going to keep on rising. I'm not one of the my way or the highway crowd, I'm part of the crowd that says, let's get something done!!

bing of AL 6:43PM April 03, 2012

mr. bill if what you say was true we (the country ) would not be in the fiscal quagmire that we find ourselves today. once again your being delusion
---------------------------------------------------------
to another topic of the day.according to major polls
( check real clear politics ) republican front runner mitt romney now trails the president by double digits among female voters.
having already lost the majority of black and hispanic voters and now women.which begg's the question,where is the path for a republican to ascend to the oval office. ?

bruce b of NV 2:16AM April 03, 2012

brucetee _ Try using provable facts sometime brucetee with link... THAT'S "a pipe dream"...
You and the scotts man may not realize (though I have stated it many times), in __CBO estimates __ they always consider it a loss of income when tax rates are cut. Scotts man hates my mentioning __ CBO real numbers __ show tax cuts for rich INCREASE government revenue. Debt comes from overspending income as it does in our household.
The tax cuts for rich by John Kennedy, Reagan, Newt, and Bush all prove it.
"In every case over the last 60 years, major tax cuts have more than paid for themselves. In fact, every major tax cut since JFK has been followed by substantial increases in revenue, not to mention solid economic growth. Moreover, total federal revenue rose at a faster rate after each of those tax cuts than it did before them. Anyone can confirm these basic facts for themselves by checking federal budget data and economic indicators before and after major tax cuts (see, for example, Federal Budget Data, Data 360 Unemployment U.S., and Total Economy Database). Let’s take a closer look at the results of the last four major tax cuts (and then for good measure we’ll examine the Mellon tax cuts of the 1920s)."
"Bush Tax Cuts: President George W. Bush’s 2003 tax cuts generated a massive increase in federal tax revenue and were followed by 52 consecutive months of economic growth. From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenue increased by $780 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. Total federal revenue from 2003 to 2007":
"2003 -- $1.78 trillion
2004 -- $1.88 trillion
2005 -- $2.15 trillion
2006 -- $2.40 trillion
2007 -- $2.56 trillion"
"Total federal revenue for 2008 dropped slightly, down to $2.52 trillion, because a recession started that year, but revenue was still substantially higher than it was in 2003 or 2004. During the same period, income tax revenue rose dramatically, going from $925 billion in 2003 to $1.53 trillion in 2007. As with other types of federal revenue, income tax revenue dropped slightly in 2008, down to $1.45 trillion, due to the fact that a recession began that year."
"It’s important to keep in mind that the recession had nothing to do with the tax cuts. The recession was brought on by destructive federal intervention in the subprime mortgage market, irresponsible funding and securitization of subprime loans by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, unsound Federal Reserve monetary policy, a lack of oversight by the Securities and Exchange Commission, greed and fraud committed by certain large banks and investment firms, and consumers who bought homes they really couldn’t afford."
http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/taxcutfacts.htm

Bill Hedges of MO 12:34AM April 03, 2012

the republicans rhetoric on budget cutting through
giant spending reductions ( at the expense of th lower and middle class ) without an increase in revenues is little more than a pipe dream.

bruce b of NV 7:46PM April 02, 2012