How George W. Bush's Two Tax Cuts, 2001 and 2003 Screwed The Pooch

[Programmer]

hint: gross government revenue is always a record in an expansion.

 

[IcebergSlim]

Okay...the dipshit shrub generated huge deficits.

Then, his successor generated even larger deficits, but he gets a pass. Why?

You have no idea what last year's deficit was, do you?

No idea at all.....

So...we are only allowed to discuss last year's deficit. Is that right?

Lower every year since FY 2009......Expected to be lower again for FY 2015

Any questions?

YUP!!! I have a question!
Did these events happen or NOT???
Just once I want you and your fellow ostrich to tell me where were you from 2000 to 2008 that you have NO memory
of these events occurring? Tell me they never happened OK? Tell the thousands that lost their jobs due to recession started
under Clinton... remember recession don't just start like turning a faucet on 03/2001! They had a decline starting in 2000!
Tell the thousands that died in 9/11 and the hurricanes.... tell them those events didn't happen OK??

Recession Are you aware that a recession started under Clinton and became official 3/01 ended 11/01?
Because you don't seem to comprehend... RECESSIONS are like football length tankers... it takes miles to turn one...i.e. so does
a "RECESSION"... it doesn't just start the day NBER states... it is a slow degradation and it started under CLINTON!!!
Source: USATODAY.com - It's official: 2001 recession only lasted eight months

A Major $5 trillion market loss Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $5 trillion in market losses?
AND GUESS WHAT LOSSES shelter other income from taxes! So during the past few years these $5 trillion in losses have been against tax payments!

Again Clinton laid claim BUT someone had to pay and it occurred during Bush's first year!
$5 trillion in market losses MEAN lost tax revenue
PLUS JOBS!!!!
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies. More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 - and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives,
$2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets.
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Are you aware this happened???
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World

SO AGAIN you totally ignorant people like you don't seem to know THOSE ARE BUSINESS LOSSES as well as NO INCOME coming in to the
companies!
Remember the Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.
I lived through it and like millions had hesitation to open any suspicious envelope. That happened millions of times!

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
Again idiots like you TOTALLY forget these were the worst hurricane SEASONS in history! The worst! No presidency every faced the following:
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005.
It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages.
It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters | Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of :
a) 400,000 jobs lost due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs lost in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts...
In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property.. IN SPITE of that:

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts

2000 $236.2 billion surplus
2001 $128.2 billion surplus
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.
So how did those 4 gigantic events affect the Gross Domestic Product from 2000 to 2009?

So starting in 2001 132,548,000 people were working.
At the end of 2008 138,056,000 people working..

So I would say GWB was fairly involved in the above YET his administration tried:

"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.

Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded and even ridiculed :
, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized
the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems,
the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and
called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze
Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," New York Times, 8/11/07)

Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle
Setting the Record Straight: The Three Most Egregious Claims In The New York Times Article On The Housing Crisis

Healthmyths -

Yea.....I got a narrative for that!

You can see the effects on nominal GDP of events from 2000-2012 here...

Here you can see the relative damage wrought by various recessions...

Be sure to file these in that bilge dump you have fasioned...

 

[IcebergSlim]

what a bias article. Bill clinton introduced a budget that was so out of line that even his own party voted against it.
then they lost both the house and senate and republicans and Newt Gingrich brought the contract for America and reduced the budget
and the dems couldn't get rid of newt fast enough
Now the dems brag how they balance the budget in those years
You dems have been very dishonest about the budget those years
...and how the dems cheered bubba's fiscal resonsibilty during 2012 convention speech, but when it was actually being done in 94 you guys demonized gingrich. Hilarious.

Yes AFTER BJ Bill's FIRST surplus the GOP passed a $700+ billion tax cut BJ Bill had to veto to get 3 more! GOP was fiscally responsible? How'd THAT work out with Dubya/GOP in full control??? lol

The Clinton years showed the effects of a large tax increase that Clinton pushed through in his first year, and that Republicans incorrectly claim is the "largest tax increase in history." It fell almost exclusively on upper-income taxpayers. Clinton’s fiscal 1994 (PRE NEWTER) budget also contained some spending restraints

The Budget and Deficit Under Clinton

You're the 2nd poser that used knight jumping to jump to a different time then the one I posted.
You dems are mad for good reason, when bubba tried at the 2012 convention to take credit for his fiscally responsible administration, and you dems cheered to know end; yet in actuality he can't really take any credit.
As far as Reagan goes. He did what he had to from one of most inept presidents in American history
And as far as bush goes. The conservatives on this board have never defended bush. Maybe the hard core gop'rs have. But us conservatives on this forum have never defend anything bush did. At least I haven't . The guy spent like a drunken sailor and had a personal hard on against Saddam.

How does Clinton NOT get credit?

Before you haul out that Contract chestnut, go take a look at the trend in deficits between 1993 and late 1997 (when Gingrich and Clinton struck their deal)......90% of the deficit bequeathed by Supply Side Idiocy, Part One was gone...

and the state of the nation bequeathed by Carter?

Avg real GDP and avg annual employment growth were higher under Carter than under Reagan....

You may be too young to recall that it was "Rosey Scenario" which informed the ambitious program of the one whom Al Greenspan deemed "the most fiscally reckless steward of the nation's economy (until Scrub the Sruplus Vaporizer)".......

 

[Iceweasel]

Not if he presides over the lowest rate of federal spending growth since Eisenhower.....

Take this to the bank....Scrub is the most fiscally reckless POTUS ever....and he will keep that crown until we are long forgotten...

Who the fuck is scrub and have you no clue how the government spends money? Congress writes the checks, Republicans have lowered spending increases, much to the chagrin of Democrats. Pelosi and gang sent spending through the roof. You are in a trance of some sort.

 

[Iceweasel]

Before you haul out that Contract chestnut, go take a look at the trend in deficits between 1993 and late 1997 (when Gingrich and Clinton struck their deal)......90% of the deficit bequeathed by Supply Side Idiocy, Part One was gone...

and the state of the nation bequeathed by Carter?

Avg real GDP and avg annual employment growth were higher under Carter than under Reagan....

You may be too young to recall that it was "Rosey Scenario" which informed the ambitious program of the one whom Al Greenspan deemed "the most fiscally reckless steward of the nation's economy (until Scrub the Sruplus Vaporizer)".......

You poor simpleton. Reagan turns things around after Carter and you're here all these years later trying to make Jimmy the victim. I remember the Carter and Reagan years, you stupid fuck. You don't get to rewrite history to satisfy your hate.

 

[IcebergSlim]

And this....its fun blowing up left wing propaganda...

“The federal debt has already grown more during Obama’s first six years than under all previous U.S. presidents combined, at least in nominal dollars with no adjustment for inflation. The debt owed to the public stands at about $13 trillion, an increase of 106 percent since Obama first took office. Total debt, counting money the government owes to itself, stands at $18.1 trillion, up 70 percent. Both debt figures continue to grow, though less rapidly than during Obama’s first few years when annual deficits topped $1 trillion for four years running.
Letter: National debt is out of control

The problem being that Bush Jr. didn't put the cost of the wars, he started, into the budget. Obama did.

And he didn't fund Medicare Part D....

Not even that, the GOP rammed it through in the middle of the night down our throats, AND FORBID THE GOV'T TO NEGOTIATE WITH PHARMA!!

Yup...pretty much all bad....

 

[healthmyths]

This should blow your left brain...it is truly amazing how EASILY Big Ears can dupe his partisan worshipers.

The truth...can you accept it?

Obama has boasted about the shrinking of the budget deficit from the more than $1 trillion seen in the first four years of his presidency. But even with that reduction, budget deficits under Obama are on track to stay higher than the highest deficit seen under President George W. Bush.

President Bush was seen by many as a big spender who squandered a rare budget surplus. But according to the Office of Management and Budget, Bush’s highest annual budget deficit was $458 billion.

That’s still $25 billion less than Obama’s lowest deficit: $483 billion in the just-finished 2014 fiscal year, and several years into what Obama himself has called an economic recovery.

So for all of Obama’s boasting this week, Obama still hasn’t managed to preside over a deficit that’s lower than Bush’s highest deficit.

" So for all of Obama’s boasting this week, Obama still hasn’t managed to preside over a deficit that’s lower than Bush’s highest deficit."



EXCEPT HIS LAST RIGHT?

Jan 7, 2009 - The U.S. budget deficit in 2009 is projected to spike to a record $1.2 trillion, or 8.3% of gross domestic product, the Congressional Budget Office


CBO projects record $1.2 trillion deficit - Jan. 7, 2009

Which INCLUDED TARP...
CHECK THE FACTS though!!!

TARP has been paid BACK and in doing so REDUCED Obama's deficit!

Now.. WHAT HAPPENED to TARP the program that Bush has been blamed for?
Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
$616.6 billion went out
$672.8 Billion came in...

ALL PAID BACK... PLUS A PROFIT of: $56.2 billion...

Okay...the dipshit shrub generated huge deficits.

Then, his successor generated even larger deficits, but he gets a pass. Why?

You have no idea what last year's deficit was, do you?

No idea at all.....

So...we are only allowed to discuss last year's deficit. Is that right?

Lower every year since FY 2009......Expected to be lower again for FY 2015

Any questions?

YUP!!! I have a question!
Did these events happen or NOT???
Just once I want you and your fellow ostrich to tell me where were you from 2000 to 2008 that you have NO memory
of these events occurring? Tell me they never happened OK? Tell the thousands that lost their jobs due to recession started
under Clinton... remember recession don't just start like turning a faucet on 03/2001! They had a decline starting in 2000!
Tell the thousands that died in 9/11 and the hurricanes.... tell them those events didn't happen OK??

Recession Are you aware that a recession started under Clinton and became official 3/01 ended 11/01?
Because you don't seem to comprehend... RECESSIONS are like football length tankers... it takes miles to turn one...i.e. so does
a "RECESSION"... it doesn't just start the day NBER states... it is a slow degradation and it started under CLINTON!!!
Source: USATODAY.com - It's official: 2001 recession only lasted eight months

A Major $5 trillion market loss Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $5 trillion in market losses?
AND GUESS WHAT LOSSES shelter other income from taxes! So during the past few years these $5 trillion in losses have been against tax payments!

Again Clinton laid claim BUT someone had to pay and it occurred during Bush's first year!
$5 trillion in market losses MEAN lost tax revenue
PLUS JOBS!!!!
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies. More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 - and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives,
$2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets.
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Are you aware this happened???
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World

SO AGAIN you totally ignorant people like you don't seem to know THOSE ARE BUSINESS LOSSES as well as NO INCOME coming in to the
companies!
Remember the Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.
I lived through it and like millions had hesitation to open any suspicious envelope. That happened millions of times!

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
Again idiots like you TOTALLY forget these were the worst hurricane SEASONS in history! The worst! No presidency every faced the following:
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005.
It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages.
It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters | Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of :
a) 400,000 jobs lost due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs lost in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts...
In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property.. IN SPITE of that:

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts

2000 $236.2 billion surplus
2001 $128.2 billion surplus
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.
So how did those 4 gigantic events affect the Gross Domestic Product from 2000 to 2009?

So starting in 2001 132,548,000 people were working.
At the end of 2008 138,056,000 people working..

So I would say GWB was fairly involved in the above YET his administration tried:

"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.

Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded and even ridiculed :
, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized
the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems,
the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and
called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze
Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," New York Times, 8/11/07)

Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle
Setting the Record Straight: The Three Most Egregious Claims In The New York Times Article On The Housing Crisis

Healthmyths -

Yea.....I got a narrative for that!

You can see the effects on nominal GDP of events from 2000-2012 here...

Here you can see the relative damage wrought by various recessions...

Be sure to file these in that bilge dump you have fasioned...

First of all I don't believe anything you write because you can't even pay attention
to the little red dotted line that would have underlined "fasioned"!!!
These are such simple things to do but idiots like you have no time for the little details and to follow just the helps that can at least add to your credibility!


Hey... YOU still ignored the FACTS those events Occurred! Why not admit they had an affect on HOUSING which had an affect on
the recession!
But you biased dishonest person is you have NOT recognize THESE FACTS!!!

-- Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis.
The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."..
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

-- Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," New York Times, 8/11/07)

Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle

 

[IcebergSlim]

Before you haul out that Contract chestnut, go take a look at the trend in deficits between 1993 and late 1997 (when Gingrich and Clinton struck their deal)......90% of the deficit bequeathed by Supply Side Idiocy, Part One was gone...

and the state of the nation bequeathed by Carter?

Avg real GDP and avg annual employment growth were higher under Carter than under Reagan....

You may be too young to recall that it was "Rosey Scenario" which informed the ambitious program of the one whom Al Greenspan deemed "the most fiscally reckless steward of the nation's economy (until Scrub the Sruplus Vaporizer)".......

You poor simpleton. Reagan turns things around after Carter and you're here all these years later trying to make Jimmy the victim. I remember the Carter and Reagan years, you stupid fuck. You don't get to rewrite history to satisfy your hate.

Presidents And Prosperity


Because budget projections in early 1981 called for
massive surpluses, it was possible, based upon the data then known, to cut taxes, increase defense, and still balance the budget. Regarding the economic forecast, the Reagan package of projections were, at most, only mildly more optimistic than other forecasts at the time.

http://www.law.gmu.edu/assets/files/publications/working_papers/00-05.pdf

Any questions?

 

[IcebergSlim]

Dems are just as much to blame for the housing crash as the gop,
and if it was so important, why didn't barack obama even vote on it.
Bret Bair is one the most respected journalist there is

I'll take the FCIC, thank you, FOX Watcher...

 

[IcebergSlim]

and yet the govt was collecting record revenue ......oooops

ONLY in the right wing bubble Bubba'


Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible," Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves

Bush-Appointed Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke: "I Don't Think That As A General Rule Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Treasury Secretary Paulson: "As A General Rule, I Don't Believe That Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Bush OMB Director Nussle: "Some Say That [The Tax Cut] Was A Total Loss. Some Say They Totally Pay For Themselves. It's Neither Extreme."


Bush CEA Chairman Lazear: "As A General Rule, We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Economic Adviser Viard: "Federal Revenue Is Lower Today Than It Would Have Been Without The Tax Cuts."


Bush Treasury Official Carroll: "We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Reagan Chief Economist Feldstein: "It's Not That You Get More Revenue By Lowering Tax Rates, It Is That You Don't Lose As Much."

Feldstein In 1986: "Hyperbole" That Reagan Tax Cut "Would Actually Increase Tax Revenue."

Conservative Economist Holtz-Eakin: "No Serious Research Evidence" Suggests Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Tax Foundation's Prante: "A Stretch" To Claim "Cutting Capital Gains Taxes Raises Tax Revenues."

yes record revenue....and today you are taking in substantially more and still running huge deficits...ooooops

Deficits have been steadily declining....

 

[IcebergSlim]

Not if he presides over the lowest rate of federal spending growth since Eisenhower.....

Take this to the bank....Scrub is the most fiscally reckless POTUS ever....and he will keep that crown until we are long forgotten...

Who the fuck is scrub and have you no clue how the government spends money? Congress writes the checks, Republicans have lowered spending increases, much to the chagrin of Democrats. Pelosi and gang sent spending through the roof. You are in a trance of some sort.

Describe what you see...

 

[healthmyths]

Okay...the dipshit shrub generated huge deficits.

Then, his successor generated even larger deficits, but he gets a pass. Why?

You have no idea what last year's deficit was, do you?

No idea at all.....

So...we are only allowed to discuss last year's deficit. Is that right?

Lower every year since FY 2009......Expected to be lower again for FY 2015

Any questions?

YUP!!! I have a question!
Did these events happen or NOT???
Just once I want you and your fellow ostrich to tell me where were you from 2000 to 2008 that you have NO memory
of these events occurring? Tell me they never happened OK? Tell the thousands that lost their jobs due to recession started
under Clinton... remember recession don't just start like turning a faucet on 03/2001! They had a decline starting in 2000!
Tell the thousands that died in 9/11 and the hurricanes.... tell them those events didn't happen OK??

Recession Are you aware that a recession started under Clinton and became official 3/01 ended 11/01?
Because you don't seem to comprehend... RECESSIONS are like football length tankers... it takes miles to turn one...i.e. so does
a "RECESSION"... it doesn't just start the day NBER states... it is a slow degradation and it started under CLINTON!!!
Source: USATODAY.com - It's official: 2001 recession only lasted eight months

A Major $5 trillion market loss Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $5 trillion in market losses?
AND GUESS WHAT LOSSES shelter other income from taxes! So during the past few years these $5 trillion in losses have been against tax payments!

Again Clinton laid claim BUT someone had to pay and it occurred during Bush's first year!
$5 trillion in market losses MEAN lost tax revenue
PLUS JOBS!!!!
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies. More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 - and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives,
$2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets.
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Are you aware this happened???
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World

SO AGAIN you totally ignorant people like you don't seem to know THOSE ARE BUSINESS LOSSES as well as NO INCOME coming in to the
companies!
Remember the Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.
I lived through it and like millions had hesitation to open any suspicious envelope. That happened millions of times!

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
Again idiots like you TOTALLY forget these were the worst hurricane SEASONS in history! The worst! No presidency every faced the following:
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005.
It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages.
It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters | Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of :
a) 400,000 jobs lost due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs lost in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts...
In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property.. IN SPITE of that:

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts

2000 $236.2 billion surplus
2001 $128.2 billion surplus
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.
So how did those 4 gigantic events affect the Gross Domestic Product from 2000 to 2009?

So starting in 2001 132,548,000 people were working.
At the end of 2008 138,056,000 people working..

So I would say GWB was fairly involved in the above YET his administration tried:

"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.

Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded and even ridiculed :
, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized
the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems,
the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and
called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze
Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," New York Times, 8/11/07)

Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle
Setting the Record Straight: The Three Most Egregious Claims In The New York Times Article On The Housing Crisis

Healthmyths -

Yea.....I got a narrative for that!

You can see the effects on nominal GDP of events from 2000-2012 here...

Here you can see the relative damage wrought by various recessions...

Be sure to file these in that bilge dump you have fasioned...

ALSO you are showing a graph that covers from 1948 to 2007!
BUT the above events affected the GDP over 59 years!
AND more importantly you should singular events, Oil crisis 1980.. Arab oil 1973... JUST 4 events in that 59 years!
But the AFFECT on GDP from 2001 to 2008 WERE FROM 5 Events in 8 years!
So of course there was a later affect on GDP as thousands of jobs were lost due to 9/11, Recession, hurricanes, and the tech bubble!
In 8 years. So of course your graph shows an affect that was compounded by those events in those 8 years including homes destroyed!

 

[IcebergSlim]

This should blow your left brain...it is truly amazing how EASILY Big Ears can dupe his partisan worshipers.

The truth...can you accept it?

Obama has boasted about the shrinking of the budget deficit from the more than $1 trillion seen in the first four years of his presidency. But even with that reduction, budget deficits under Obama are on track to stay higher than the highest deficit seen under President George W. Bush.

President Bush was seen by many as a big spender who squandered a rare budget surplus. But according to the Office of Management and Budget, Bush’s highest annual budget deficit was $458 billion.

That’s still $25 billion less than Obama’s lowest deficit: $483 billion in the just-finished 2014 fiscal year, and several years into what Obama himself has called an economic recovery.

So for all of Obama’s boasting this week, Obama still hasn’t managed to preside over a deficit that’s lower than Bush’s highest deficit.

" So for all of Obama’s boasting this week, Obama still hasn’t managed to preside over a deficit that’s lower than Bush’s highest deficit."



EXCEPT HIS LAST RIGHT?

Jan 7, 2009 - The U.S. budget deficit in 2009 is projected to spike to a record $1.2 trillion, or 8.3% of gross domestic product, the Congressional Budget Office


CBO projects record $1.2 trillion deficit - Jan. 7, 2009

Which INCLUDED TARP...
CHECK THE FACTS though!!!

TARP has been paid BACK and in doing so REDUCED Obama's deficit!

Now.. WHAT HAPPENED to TARP the program that Bush has been blamed for?
Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
$616.6 billion went out
$672.8 Billion came in...

ALL PAID BACK... PLUS A PROFIT of: $56.2 billion...

View attachment 50755

You have no idea what last year's deficit was, do you?

No idea at all.....

So...we are only allowed to discuss last year's deficit. Is that right?

Lower every year since FY 2009......Expected to be lower again for FY 2015

Any questions?

YUP!!! I have a question!
Did these events happen or NOT???
Just once I want you and your fellow ostrich to tell me where were you from 2000 to 2008 that you have NO memory
of these events occurring? Tell me they never happened OK? Tell the thousands that lost their jobs due to recession started
under Clinton... remember recession don't just start like turning a faucet on 03/2001! They had a decline starting in 2000!
Tell the thousands that died in 9/11 and the hurricanes.... tell them those events didn't happen OK??

Recession Are you aware that a recession started under Clinton and became official 3/01 ended 11/01?
Because you don't seem to comprehend... RECESSIONS are like football length tankers... it takes miles to turn one...i.e. so does
a "RECESSION"... it doesn't just start the day NBER states... it is a slow degradation and it started under CLINTON!!!
Source: USATODAY.com - It's official: 2001 recession only lasted eight months

A Major $5 trillion market loss Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $5 trillion in market losses?
AND GUESS WHAT LOSSES shelter other income from taxes! So during the past few years these $5 trillion in losses have been against tax payments!

Again Clinton laid claim BUT someone had to pay and it occurred during Bush's first year!
$5 trillion in market losses MEAN lost tax revenue
PLUS JOBS!!!!
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies. More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 - and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives,
$2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets.
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Are you aware this happened???
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World

SO AGAIN you totally ignorant people like you don't seem to know THOSE ARE BUSINESS LOSSES as well as NO INCOME coming in to the
companies!
Remember the Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.
I lived through it and like millions had hesitation to open any suspicious envelope. That happened millions of times!

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
Again idiots like you TOTALLY forget these were the worst hurricane SEASONS in history! The worst! No presidency every faced the following:
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005.
It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages.
It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters | Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of :
a) 400,000 jobs lost due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs lost in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts...
In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property.. IN SPITE of that:

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts

2000 $236.2 billion surplus
2001 $128.2 billion surplus
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.
So how did those 4 gigantic events affect the Gross Domestic Product from 2000 to 2009?

So starting in 2001 132,548,000 people were working.
At the end of 2008 138,056,000 people working..

So I would say GWB was fairly involved in the above YET his administration tried:

"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.

Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded and even ridiculed :
, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized
the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems,
the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and
called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze
Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," New York Times, 8/11/07)

Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle
Setting the Record Straight: The Three Most Egregious Claims In The New York Times Article On The Housing Crisis

Healthmyths -

Yea.....I got a narrative for that!

You can see the effects on nominal GDP of events from 2000-2012 here...

Here you can see the relative damage wrought by various recessions...

Be sure to file these in that bilge dump you have fasioned...

First of all I don't believe anything you write because you can't even pay attention
to the little red dotted line that would have underlined "fasioned"!!!
These are such simple things to do but idiots like you have no time for the little details and to follow just the helps that can at least add to your credibility!


Hey... YOU still ignored the FACTS those events Occurred! Why not admit they had an affect on HOUSING which had an affect on
the recession!
But you biased dishonest person is you have NOT recognize THESE FACTS!!!

-- Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis.
The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."..
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

-- Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," New York Times, 8/11/07)

Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle

I separate facts from the opinions of hacks...

 

[IcebergSlim]

You have no idea what last year's deficit was, do you?

No idea at all.....

So...we are only allowed to discuss last year's deficit. Is that right?

Lower every year since FY 2009......Expected to be lower again for FY 2015

Any questions?

YUP!!! I have a question!
Did these events happen or NOT???
Just once I want you and your fellow ostrich to tell me where were you from 2000 to 2008 that you have NO memory
of these events occurring? Tell me they never happened OK? Tell the thousands that lost their jobs due to recession started
under Clinton... remember recession don't just start like turning a faucet on 03/2001! They had a decline starting in 2000!
Tell the thousands that died in 9/11 and the hurricanes.... tell them those events didn't happen OK??

Recession Are you aware that a recession started under Clinton and became official 3/01 ended 11/01?
Because you don't seem to comprehend... RECESSIONS are like football length tankers... it takes miles to turn one...i.e. so does
a "RECESSION"... it doesn't just start the day NBER states... it is a slow degradation and it started under CLINTON!!!
Source: USATODAY.com - It's official: 2001 recession only lasted eight months

A Major $5 trillion market loss Are you aware that the dot.com bust occurred and cost $5 trillion in market losses?
AND GUESS WHAT LOSSES shelter other income from taxes! So during the past few years these $5 trillion in losses have been against tax payments!

Again Clinton laid claim BUT someone had to pay and it occurred during Bush's first year!
$5 trillion in market losses MEAN lost tax revenue
PLUS JOBS!!!!
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies. More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 - and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
Source: The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion

The worst attacks on the USA in History.. 3,000 deaths!!!
Obviously most of you are UNAWARE 9/11 cost 3,000 lives,
$2 trillion in lost businesses,market values assets.
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York.
Are you aware this happened???
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone. Airlines didn't fly for 3 days!
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
Source: 10 Events That Rocked the Financial World

SO AGAIN you totally ignorant people like you don't seem to know THOSE ARE BUSINESS LOSSES as well as NO INCOME coming in to the
companies!
Remember the Anthrax Attacks...
The 2001 anthrax attacks in the United States, also known as Amerithrax from its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) case name, occurred over the course of several weeks beginning on Tuesday, September 18, 2001, one week after the September 11 attacks. Letters containing anthrax spores were mailed to several news media offices and two DemocraticU.S. Senators, killing five people and infecting 17 others.
I lived through it and like millions had hesitation to open any suspicious envelope. That happened millions of times!

$1 trillion in losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history.
Again idiots like you TOTALLY forget these were the worst hurricane SEASONS in history! The worst! No presidency every faced the following:
The worst, Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005.
It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages.
It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.

Rank Disaster Year Deaths Damage* $250 Billion in damages in the 8 disasters of the top 15 disasters in history!
1. Hurricane Katrina (LA/MS/AL/FL) 2005 1833 $133,800,000,000
6. Hurricane Ike (TX/LA/MS) 2008 112 $27,000,000,000
7. Hurricane Wilma (FL) 2005 35 $17,100,000,000
8. Hurricane Rita (TX/LA) 2005 119 $17,100,000,000
9. Hurricane Charley (FL) 2004 35 $16,500,000,000
12. Midwest Floods 2008 24 $15,000,000,000
13. Hurricane Ivan (FL/AL) 2004 57 $13,000,000,000
14. 30-State Drought 2002 0 $11,400,000,000
Costliest U.S. Weather Disasters | Weather Underground

THESE events OCCURRED!
YET in SPITE of :
a) 400,000 jobs lost due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita ,
b) 2,800,000 jobs lost in alone due to 9/11,
c) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts...
In spite of nearly $8 trillion in lost businesses, market values, destroyed property.. IN SPITE of that:

AFTER the tax cuts Federal Tax REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts

2000 $236.2 billion surplus
2001 $128.2 billion surplus
2002 $157.8 billion deficit.. also 9/11 occurred and tax revenues lowered for years later
2003 $377.6 billion deficit.. BRAND new cabinet Homeland Security, plus loans made to businesses.. again tax revenues down..affect of 9/11
2004 $412.7 billion deficit.. Revenues up by 5.5% spending increased and economy getting back.
2005 $318.3 billion deficit.. revenues up by 14.5% deficit decreasing at rate of 22%
2006 $248.2 billion deficit.. revenues up by 11.7% deficit decrease 22%
2007 $160.7 billion deficit.. revenues up by 6.7% deficit decrease 35%
2008 $458.6 billion deficit.. revenues down and deficit INCREASED TARP loan mostly...
Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.
So how did those 4 gigantic events affect the Gross Domestic Product from 2000 to 2009?

So starting in 2001 132,548,000 people were working.
At the end of 2008 138,056,000 people working..

So I would say GWB was fairly involved in the above YET his administration tried:

"Over the past six years, the President and his Administration have not only warned of the systemic consequences of failure to reform GSEs but also put forward thoughtful plans to reduce the risk that either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac would encounter such difficulties.
President Bush publicly called for GSE reform at least 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted.

Unfortunately, these warnings went unheeded and even ridiculed :
, as the President's repeated attempts to reform the supervision of these entities were thwarted by the legislative maneuvering of those who emphatically denied there were problems.
Many prominent Democrats, including House Finance Chairman Barney Frank, opposed any legislation correcting the risks posed by GSEs.
* House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-MA) criticized
the President's warning saying:
"these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis .
The more people exaggerate these problems,
the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."...
(Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," New York Times, 9/11/03)

* Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd also ignored the President's warnings and
called on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze
Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," New York Times, 8/11/07)

Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle
Setting the Record Straight: The Three Most Egregious Claims In The New York Times Article On The Housing Crisis

Healthmyths -

Yea.....I got a narrative for that!

You can see the effects on nominal GDP of events from 2000-2012 here...

Here you can see the relative damage wrought by various recessions...

Be sure to file these in that bilge dump you have fasioned...

ALSO you are showing a graph that covers from 1948 to 2007!
BUT the above events affected the GDP over 59 years!
AND more importantly you should singular events, Oil crisis 1980.. Arab oil 1973... JUST 4 events in that 59 years!
But the AFFECT on GDP from 2001 to 2008 WERE FROM 5 Events in 8 years!
So of course there was a later affect on GDP as thousands of jobs were lost due to 9/11, Recession, hurricanes, and the tech bubble!
In 8 years. So of course your graph shows an affect that was compounded by those events in those 8 years including homes destroyed!

You don't pay much attention, do you?

I showed you the trends in nominal GDP from 2000-2012......

If you want to grasp the economic effects of all the hysterical pap you spew, it will be evident in those numbers.....

If you want to discuss what happened BEFORE, I'm here for ya, dawg....

 

[Iceweasel]

Before you haul out that Contract chestnut, go take a look at the trend in deficits between 1993 and late 1997 (when Gingrich and Clinton struck their deal)......90% of the deficit bequeathed by Supply Side Idiocy, Part One was gone...

and the state of the nation bequeathed by Carter?

Avg real GDP and avg annual employment growth were higher under Carter than under Reagan....

You may be too young to recall that it was "Rosey Scenario" which informed the ambitious program of the one whom Al Greenspan deemed "the most fiscally reckless steward of the nation's economy (until Scrub the Sruplus Vaporizer)".......

You poor simpleton. Reagan turns things around after Carter and you're here all these years later trying to make Jimmy the victim. I remember the Carter and Reagan years, you stupid fuck. You don't get to rewrite history to satisfy your hate.

Presidents And Prosperity

Because budget projections in early 1981 called for
massive surpluses, it was possible, based upon the data then known, to cut taxes, increase defense, and still balance the budget. Regarding the economic forecast, the Reagan package of projections were, at most, only mildly more optimistic than other forecasts at the time.

http://www.law.gmu.edu/assets/files/publications/working_papers/00-05.pdf

Any questions?

Yes. What's your point? Are you trying to give Carter the credit?

 

[IcebergSlim]

Before you haul out that Contract chestnut, go take a look at the trend in deficits between 1993 and late 1997 (when Gingrich and Clinton struck their deal)......90% of the deficit bequeathed by Supply Side Idiocy, Part One was gone...

and the state of the nation bequeathed by Carter?

Avg real GDP and avg annual employment growth were higher under Carter than under Reagan....

You may be too young to recall that it was "Rosey Scenario" which informed the ambitious program of the one whom Al Greenspan deemed "the most fiscally reckless steward of the nation's economy (until Scrub the Sruplus Vaporizer)".......

You poor simpleton. Reagan turns things around after Carter and you're here all these years later trying to make Jimmy the victim. I remember the Carter and Reagan years, you stupid fuck. You don't get to rewrite history to satisfy your hate.

Presidents And Prosperity

Because budget projections in early 1981 called for
massive surpluses, it was possible, based upon the data then known, to cut taxes, increase defense, and still balance the budget. Regarding the economic forecast, the Reagan package of projections were, at most, only mildly more optimistic than other forecasts at the time.

http://www.law.gmu.edu/assets/files/publications/working_papers/00-05.pdf

Any questions?

Yes. What's your point? Are you trying to give Carter the credit?

I'm here to school you....

Did you have any other questions?

 

[Iceweasel]

and yet the govt was collecting record revenue ......oooops

ONLY in the right wing bubble Bubba'


Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible," Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves

Bush-Appointed Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke: "I Don't Think That As A General Rule Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Treasury Secretary Paulson: "As A General Rule, I Don't Believe That Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Bush OMB Director Nussle: "Some Say That [The Tax Cut] Was A Total Loss. Some Say They Totally Pay For Themselves. It's Neither Extreme."


Bush CEA Chairman Lazear: "As A General Rule, We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Economic Adviser Viard: "Federal Revenue Is Lower Today Than It Would Have Been Without The Tax Cuts."


Bush Treasury Official Carroll: "We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Reagan Chief Economist Feldstein: "It's Not That You Get More Revenue By Lowering Tax Rates, It Is That You Don't Lose As Much."

Feldstein In 1986: "Hyperbole" That Reagan Tax Cut "Would Actually Increase Tax Revenue."

Conservative Economist Holtz-Eakin: "No Serious Research Evidence" Suggests Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Tax Foundation's Prante: "A Stretch" To Claim "Cutting Capital Gains Taxes Raises Tax Revenues."

yes record revenue....and today you are taking in substantially more and still running huge deficits...ooooops

Deficits have been steadily declining....

What does projected income have to do with deficits?

 

[Iceweasel]

Before you haul out that Contract chestnut, go take a look at the trend in deficits between 1993 and late 1997 (when Gingrich and Clinton struck their deal)......90% of the deficit bequeathed by Supply Side Idiocy, Part One was gone...

and the state of the nation bequeathed by Carter?

Avg real GDP and avg annual employment growth were higher under Carter than under Reagan....

You may be too young to recall that it was "Rosey Scenario" which informed the ambitious program of the one whom Al Greenspan deemed "the most fiscally reckless steward of the nation's economy (until Scrub the Sruplus Vaporizer)".......

You poor simpleton. Reagan turns things around after Carter and you're here all these years later trying to make Jimmy the victim. I remember the Carter and Reagan years, you stupid fuck. You don't get to rewrite history to satisfy your hate.

Presidents And Prosperity

Because budget projections in early 1981 called for
massive surpluses, it was possible, based upon the data then known, to cut taxes, increase defense, and still balance the budget. Regarding the economic forecast, the Reagan package of projections were, at most, only mildly more optimistic than other forecasts at the time.

http://www.law.gmu.edu/assets/files/publications/working_papers/00-05.pdf

Any questions?

Yes. What's your point? Are you trying to give Carter the credit?

I'm here to school you....

Did you have any other questions?

You can't school a gerbil apparently. You make no sense.

 

[IcebergSlim]

and yet the govt was collecting record revenue ......oooops

ONLY in the right wing bubble Bubba'


Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible," Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves

Bush-Appointed Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke: "I Don't Think That As A General Rule Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Treasury Secretary Paulson: "As A General Rule, I Don't Believe That Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Bush OMB Director Nussle: "Some Say That [The Tax Cut] Was A Total Loss. Some Say They Totally Pay For Themselves. It's Neither Extreme."


Bush CEA Chairman Lazear: "As A General Rule, We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Economic Adviser Viard: "Federal Revenue Is Lower Today Than It Would Have Been Without The Tax Cuts."


Bush Treasury Official Carroll: "We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Reagan Chief Economist Feldstein: "It's Not That You Get More Revenue By Lowering Tax Rates, It Is That You Don't Lose As Much."

Feldstein In 1986: "Hyperbole" That Reagan Tax Cut "Would Actually Increase Tax Revenue."

Conservative Economist Holtz-Eakin: "No Serious Research Evidence" Suggests Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Tax Foundation's Prante: "A Stretch" To Claim "Cutting Capital Gains Taxes Raises Tax Revenues."

yes record revenue....and today you are taking in substantially more and still running huge deficits...ooooops

Deficits have been steadily declining....

What does projected income have to do with deficits?

What do you think you are getting at?

 

[IcebergSlim]

Before you haul out that Contract chestnut, go take a look at the trend in deficits between 1993 and late 1997 (when Gingrich and Clinton struck their deal)......90% of the deficit bequeathed by Supply Side Idiocy, Part One was gone...

and the state of the nation bequeathed by Carter?

Avg real GDP and avg annual employment growth were higher under Carter than under Reagan....

You may be too young to recall that it was "Rosey Scenario" which informed the ambitious program of the one whom Al Greenspan deemed "the most fiscally reckless steward of the nation's economy (until Scrub the Sruplus Vaporizer)".......

You poor simpleton. Reagan turns things around after Carter and you're here all these years later trying to make Jimmy the victim. I remember the Carter and Reagan years, you stupid fuck. You don't get to rewrite history to satisfy your hate.

Presidents And Prosperity

Because budget projections in early 1981 called for
massive surpluses, it was possible, based upon the data then known, to cut taxes, increase defense, and still balance the budget. Regarding the economic forecast, the Reagan package of projections were, at most, only mildly more optimistic than other forecasts at the time.

http://www.law.gmu.edu/assets/files/publications/working_papers/00-05.pdf

Any questions?

Yes. What's your point? Are you trying to give Carter the credit?

I'm here to school you....

Did you have any other questions?

You can't school a gerbil apparently. You make no sense.

Perhaps you should go back to being a Useful Idiot at Daily Caller, or Breitbart......

With what part of the facts you've been presented are you struggling?