View Single Post
  #1663 (permalink)  
Old 03-04-2008
sck5 sck5 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 2,174
Rep Power: 5
sck5 is on a distinguished road
"One last time, then I'm done with this.

DEFICITS ARE CAUSED BY SPENDING MORE THAN YOU TAKE IN. PERIOD.

Tax cuts generated more revenue, the deficts occured because spending increased.

IS IT THAT BLOODY HARD TO UNDERSTAND?"

Calm down now, and I will try to explain the inconsistency in what you are saying.

You are assuming that ALL of the additional tax revenue you see came from the tax cut when that is not the case at all. In a growing economy, the tax base is constantly expanding, which means that you can cut taxes and still take in more money, but that you are nevertheless taking in less than you would have if you left tax rates where they were.

You are attributing ALL of the increased amount to the lowered rate when it is the increased base that is the real cause. You might reply, yes, it is because of the tax cut that the base increased. But that wont wash either.

For your belief to be consistent, you would have to believe that without the the tax cut there would have been no growth at all. And nobody believes that economic growth would have ground to a complete halt if the tax cuts didnt occur.

Look at the recent history of this country and you will see a huge problem for your theory. In 1993 Clinton and the Dems passed a big tax bill that not one single republican signed onto. The seven years of growth thereafter were higher than the seven previous years under Bush/Reagan and also higher than the next seven years under Bush Jr.

So, apparently, keeping our fiscal house in order (which old fashiioned Repubs used to do) is GOOD for the economy. Even if you dont believe that, it is obvious that the 1993 tax increase sure as hell didnt PREVENT the high growth of the 90's.

It is an article of almost religious faith among conservatives that tax cuts are always and everywhere good. You seem to have drunk that kool aid. I didnt. The evidence seems to be with me.

So as to your statement above? You are correct that deficits are caused by spending more than you take in. You are incorrect that the gap is caused ONLY by spending more. It can equally well be caused by taking in less. That aint rocket science.

Last edited by sck5; 03-04-2008 at 06:39 PM. Reason: mistyped
Reply With Quote Share with Facebook
Sponsored Links