Evaluation of the policies of George W. Bush and his Republican conservatives on America.
Published on April 28, 2006 By COL Gene In Politics



To illustrate the failure of the current policies lets look at two alternate ways to use $150 Billion tax dollars each year.

Bush wants the tax cuts for his wealthy supporters made permanent. The reduction in the tax rates on the TWO TOP income brackets and the reduced dividend taxes rate cost the treasury about $150 Billion EVERY Year in tax revenue compared with restoring the rates on just the wealthiest tax payers to pre 2000 rates.

The Bush plan will have the money go to people who do not need the added money and who will not spend most of that $150 billion.

Consider this alternative. Restore the Tax rates on the wealthy and use the added federal revenue to fund tax credits to install geothermal, solar conversion or wind generation equipment on their homes or small bisinesses to reduce the demand for foreign energy. This plan would also create jobs and added profits for the companies installing and manufacturing this new equipment. When the equipment was installed, the homeowner would have lower energy bills which would enable them to increase their non energy purchases to help stimulate economic activity. We would lower our purchase of foreign oil and gas.

Which plan is better for our economy? Which plan would benefit the most people? Which plan would help move us away from dependence on foreign oil?

Which plan do you think Bush and his GOP leadership in Congress will support?

Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Apr 30, 2006
What an idiot

For the simple minded let's put it this way. We cut taxes by three dollars and added ONE dollar of increased tax revenue from the economic growth the tax cut produced. We spent three dollars to get one back. Just like feeding the slot machines.
on Apr 30, 2006
What an idiot

For the simple minded let's put it this way. We cut taxes by three dollars and added ONE dollar of increased tax revenue from the economic growth the tax cut produced. We spent three dollars to get one back. Just like feeding the slot machines.


"I'm" the idiot? "You're" the one with math problems not me.
Bush's tax cuts equaled approx 5% per annum.

2000 5.9
2001 3.2
2002 3.4
2003 4.8
2004 7.0
2005 6.4


Taxable revenue in the US has gone up approx 3.2% to 7% per year with most on the high side of 5%. So tell me again how we cut $3 and only got $1 back.
on Apr 30, 2006
How utterly slow can you be Col? "WE" got three dollars back, and the government got their dollar. You can sit there and give the truth the hand, but you can't convince people with a brain that the stockholders and owners of companies aren't "we".

Money in the government does little for anyone. MOney in the system is productive, even if it is sitting in the bank or in your stock portfolio. You'd just rather steal our money and send it to people who will hand it back and forth and build roads that go nowhere.
on May 01, 2006
drmiler

Let's complete the story. The annual budget deficit in 2000 was ZERO. We had a balanced budget. The tax revenue was equal to our spending. In 2005 we spent $600 Billion MORE then the tax revenue.

In 2000 the TOTAL National Debt was 5.7 Trillion in 2006 it is $8.3 Trillion heading for $10 Trillion by 2008 according to Bush.

The interest the tax payers pay on our debt in 2000 was $230 Billion. It is over $350 Billion today heading for $500 Billion by 2010.

I agree with the tax cuts for the middle income workers which is the source of the increased revenue you indicate. It is the tax cuts to the wealthy, which is about 1/2 the total that is not producing a positive return.

What I have proposed is make the tax cuts for the middle income permanent BECAUSE THAT HELPS SPENDING.

Return the tax rates on the wealthy to the pre 2000 rates to help balance the budget with little impact on spending.


Bakerstreet

Drmiler’s numbers show 3 to 1 return on taxable revenue but it takes a 4 to 1 to just replace the lost tax revenue from the cuts. The overall rate paid by all taxpayers to federal income taxes is just about 25%. Thus to just equal a dollar of lost revenue from the tax cuts we must generate 4 dollars of NEW TAXABLE INCOME times 25% = the one dollar in lost tax revenue. Studies by OMB showed that the NET impact of the Bush tax cuts through 2004 was that they ADDED $1.2 Trillion to the national debt. Here are two facts that all your BS can not change:

The NET impact from the tax cuts is negative i.e. we gave up more tax revenue from the cuts then we gained in new INCOME. i.e.we lost $1.2 Trillion between 2001-2004.

We are spending $600 Billion every year MORE then we TAX.
2 Pages1 2