Why aren't the Bush Tax Cuts Working?

[Google]

you gotta just love the the evenhanded consistency of CON$ervatism. Bush is not responsible for anything that happened while he was pResident. The 2007 Bush Depression was not his fault because in 2007 there was a Dem Congress. But the 2001 Bush Recession was not his fault because even though there was a GOP Congress since 1995 it had to a president's fault and not Congress', so even though Clinton was not president in 2001, it was his fault and not the GOP congress.

See the consistency! Everything is always thew Democrats fault no matter who is president or who controls Congress.

And the Bush tax cuts were passed in June 2001. It's amazing just how ignorant of recent history CON$ are!!!!!!!!!!

Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (Pub.L. 107-16, 115 Stat. 38, June 7, 2001), was a sweeping piece of tax legislation in the United States by President George W. Bush. It is commonly known by its abbreviation EGTRRA, often pronounced "egg-tra" or "egg-terra", and sometimes also known simply as the 2001 act (especially where the context of a discussion is clearly about taxes), but is more commonly referred to as one of the two "Bush tax cuts".

The immaturity of leftist individuals never ceases to astound me. Since you are so obviously educated on recent history which party, preceding the multi-billion dollar accounting scandals that rocked the government backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, resisted any and all regulation or auditing of these institutions that undeniably caused the housing crisis that resulted in the economic recession we are still fighting against?

The Bush recession? You are a disingenuous, ill-informed, childish partisan.

Are you talking about the regulations and audits that never got out of the GOP controlled committees??? Or are you talking about the Pelosi bill that was the only reform that became law???

Republican Congress Talked About Financial Reform, But Did Nothing

In 2003, Republicans controlled both branches of Congress (108th) and the White House. What happened to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulatory reform under Republican leadership? Nothing.
Here's what I found when I searched THOMAS for the phrase Fannie Mae for the 108th Congress (2003-2004): eight bills .... but only six appear to relate to this topic, per their title. Of those six, only one was introduced after the White House weighed in (at least rhetorically) in September ... and the prime sponsor of that bill was a Democrat. The other bills seem to have resulted from the July scandal. No bill moved out of committee.





On 31 July 2007, after the Democrats obtained control of the Congress in the November 2006 election, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced HR 3221, a "bill to provide needed housing reform and for other purposes." Among other things, the bill granted the newly formed Federal Housing Finance Agency "supervisory and regulatory authority over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the federal home loan banks (enterprises)" (per CRS analysis).
Pelosi's bill became Public Law 110-289 on 30 July 2008.

So what you are saying is that during the time the Republicans held control over congress they were responsible for the legislation and actions that were taken? I can agree with that, but try and use that same logic when speaking about the present.

Yes, in 2008 after the subprime mortgage crisis had already begun decimating the US economy this bill was passed. In fact its' stated goal was to "address the subprime mortgage crisis". Address a crisis after it became a crisis.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Right Obama deficits are bigger than any Reagan budget, it's Spending!!!

This is factually incorrect.

The deficit for 2010 was approximately 9% of GDP. Reagan routinely had budgets over 22% of GDP.

Along with the 20,000,000 jobs he created, you could get away with it under those circumstances.

Again, factually incorrect. Jobs grew under Reagan from 91M to 107M. That's only 16,000,000 net jobs, or roughly 160,000 a month. Barely enough to keep up.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Obama deficit $1.27T > Reagan $1.02T budget

HaHa!! Well sure, if you don't want to adjust for inflation. In that case we can claim Reagan's deficits were bigger than any President prior to 1950! Big freakin' deal!

It doesn't help the conversation to be dishonest.

 

[Google]

you gotta just love the the evenhanded consistency of CON$ervatism. Bush is not responsible for anything that happened while he was pResident. The 2007 Bush Depression was not his fault because in 2007 there was a Dem Congress. But the 2001 Bush Recession was not his fault because even though there was a GOP Congress since 1995 it had to a president's fault and not Congress', so even though Clinton was not president in 2001, it was his fault and not the GOP congress.

See the consistency! Everything is always thew Democrats fault no matter who is president or who controls Congress.

And the Bush tax cuts were passed in June 2001. It's amazing just how ignorant of recent history CON$ are!!!!!!!!!!

Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (Pub.L. 107-16, 115 Stat. 38, June 7, 2001), was a sweeping piece of tax legislation in the United States by President George W. Bush. It is commonly known by its abbreviation EGTRRA, often pronounced "egg-tra" or "egg-terra", and sometimes also known simply as the 2001 act (especially where the context of a discussion is clearly about taxes), but is more commonly referred to as one of the two "Bush tax cuts".

The immaturity of leftist individuals never ceases to astound me. Since you are so obviously educated on recent history which party, preceding the multi-billion dollar accounting scandals that rocked the government backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, resisted any and all regulation or auditing of these institutions that undeniably caused the housing crisis that resulted in the economic recession we are still fighting against?

The Bush recession? You are a disingenuous, ill-informed, childish partisan.

Are you talking about the regulations and audits that never got out of the GOP controlled committees??? Or are you talking about the Pelosi bill that was the only reform that became law???

Republican Congress Talked About Financial Reform, But Did Nothing

In 2003, Republicans controlled both branches of Congress (108th) and the White House. What happened to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulatory reform under Republican leadership? Nothing.
Here's what I found when I searched THOMAS for the phrase Fannie Mae for the 108th Congress (2003-2004): eight bills .... but only six appear to relate to this topic, per their title. Of those six, only one was introduced after the White House weighed in (at least rhetorically) in September ... and the prime sponsor of that bill was a Democrat. The other bills seem to have resulted from the July scandal. No bill moved out of committee.





On 31 July 2007, after the Democrats obtained control of the Congress in the November 2006 election, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced HR 3221, a "bill to provide needed housing reform and for other purposes." Among other things, the bill granted the newly formed Federal Housing Finance Agency "supervisory and regulatory authority over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the federal home loan banks (enterprises)" (per CRS analysis).
Pelosi's bill became Public Law 110-289 on 30 July 2008.

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - NYTimes.com

But wait, WHO told us these actions were not needed because these institutions were sound and there was no cause for concern? Go Google it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama deficit $1.27T > Reagan $1.02T budget

HaHa!! Well sure, if you don't want to adjust for inflation. In that case we can claim Reagan's deficits were bigger than any President prior to 1950! Big freakin' deal!

It doesn't help the conversation to be dishonest.

You're a flat-out fucking lying, Kool Aid Snorting Obama Fluffer.

Ha! Ha!

 

[DontBeStupid]

Right Obama deficits are bigger than any Reagan budget, it's Spending!!!

This is factually incorrect.

The deficit for 2010 was approximately 9% of GDP. Reagan routinely had budgets over 22% of GDP.

Also, you're a flat-out fucking liar

I don't know why you choose to be ignorant on these topics. There is tons of information out there readily available.

Don't be stupid, look it up!

 

[Google]

Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the six years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.


http://mccain.senate.gov/public/ind...ecord_id=c97d478f-f460-4253-b2ec-8d9fbcaff20c

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is factually incorrect.

The deficit for 2010 was approximately 9% of GDP. Reagan routinely had budgets over 22% of GDP.

Also, you're a flat-out fucking liar

I don't know why you choose to be ignorant on these topics. There is tons of information out there readily available.

Don't be stupid, look it up!

Obama Deficit > Reagan Budget

 

[Google]

This is factually incorrect.

The deficit for 2010 was approximately 9% of GDP. Reagan routinely had budgets over 22% of GDP.

Also, you're a flat-out fucking liar

I don't know why you choose to be ignorant on these topics. There is tons of information out there readily available.

Don't be stupid, look it up!

Why don't you provide your source? You stated something, why can't you back it up?

Whenever I post something I normally provide a source, and if I'm called out I most definitely will. Why is that is hard?

 

[DontBeStupid]

Also, you're a flat-out fucking liar

I don't know why you choose to be ignorant on these topics. There is tons of information out there readily available.

Don't be stupid, look it up!

Why don't you provide your source? You stated something, why can't you back it up?

Whenever I post something I normally provide a source, and if I'm called out I most definitely will. Why is that is hard?

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Anything else I can help you with?

 

[Google]

I don't know why you choose to be ignorant on these topics. There is tons of information out there readily available.

Don't be stupid, look it up!

Why don't you provide your source? You stated something, why can't you back it up?

Whenever I post something I normally provide a source, and if I'm called out I most definitely will. Why is that is hard?

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary

Anything else I can help you with?

I fail to see your point though? Reagan is out of office, what's more he is not even on this Earth any longer.

All of your posts continually cite Reagan as a justification for the current actions of this administration, and you know a liberal is desperate when they look to Reagan for justification.

Reagan isn't in office, and you can't blame him for our current problems.

 

[edthecynic]

Right Obama deficits are bigger than any Reagan budget, it's Spending!!!

This is factually incorrect.

The deficit for 2010 was approximately 9% of GDP. Reagan routinely had budgets over 22% of GDP.

You're an Obama Fluffer.

Reagan Sends $1 Trillion Budget to Congress, and Battle Is Joined - NYTimes.com

"Most of the details of the President's plan for spending $1.02 trillion in the fiscal year 1988 had been disclosed in recent days, and the Democrats who will control both houses of the new Congress were quick to attack when the document was issued this morning"

2011 Deficit | How does Obama's 2011 projected deficit compare? - Los Angeles Times

"The deficit is estimated at $1.27 trillion in 2011 -- down from a record $1.56 trillion in the current year."

Obama deficit $1.27T > Reagan $1.02T budget

Wait just a minute there Slick, aren't you dishonestly comparing 1988 dollars to 2010 dollars?

What would the 1988 budget be in 2010 dollars?
That would make St Ronnie's budget $1.91T.

Inflation Calculator- from InflationData.com

Inflation Calculator Results:​

Total inflation over the period from January 1988 to January 2010 is 87.28%

 

[DontBeStupid]

Reagan isn't in office, and you can't blame him for our current problems.

Wow! I have no idea how you think I'm blaming Reagan for today's problems! I never wrote that. Never even wrote anything close to it. Are you reading my posts before you respond?

I'm merely correcting people and showing that Reagan's budgets and deficits were almost as bad as our current situation.

 

[edthecynic]

Right Obama deficits are bigger than any Reagan budget, it's Spending!!!

This is factually incorrect.

The deficit for 2010 was approximately 9% of GDP. Reagan routinely had budgets over 22% of GDP.

Along with the 20,000,000 jobs he created, you could get away with it under those circumstances.

But only if St Ronnie was president for 13 years!!!!

 

[Google]

Reagan isn't in office, and you can't blame him for our current problems.

Wow! I have no idea how you think I'm blaming Reagan for today's problems! I never wrote that. Never even wrote anything close to it. Are you reading my posts before you respond?

I'm merely correcting people and showing that Reagan's budgets and deficits were almost as bad as our current situation.

You brought up Reagan. Every other time--and let me be clear I enjoy when you are on a thread, you don't name call or anything, just clean back and forth--you are the one that invokes the great Reagan to rationalize the debt/deficit of the Obama administration.

 

[Google]

This is factually incorrect.

The deficit for 2010 was approximately 9% of GDP. Reagan routinely had budgets over 22% of GDP.

Along with the 20,000,000 jobs he created, you could get away with it under those circumstances.

But only if St Ronnie was president for 13 years!!!!

I guess you have given up on that whole Bush recession thing?

 

[edthecynic]

The immaturity of leftist individuals never ceases to astound me. Since you are so obviously educated on recent history which party, preceding the multi-billion dollar accounting scandals that rocked the government backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, resisted any and all regulation or auditing of these institutions that undeniably caused the housing crisis that resulted in the economic recession we are still fighting against?

The Bush recession? You are a disingenuous, ill-informed, childish partisan.

Are you talking about the regulations and audits that never got out of the GOP controlled committees??? Or are you talking about the Pelosi bill that was the only reform that became law???

Republican Congress Talked About Financial Reform, But Did Nothing

In 2003, Republicans controlled both branches of Congress (108th) and the White House. What happened to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulatory reform under Republican leadership? Nothing.
Here's what I found when I searched THOMAS for the phrase Fannie Mae for the 108th Congress (2003-2004): eight bills .... but only six appear to relate to this topic, per their title. Of those six, only one was introduced after the White House weighed in (at least rhetorically) in September ... and the prime sponsor of that bill was a Democrat. The other bills seem to have resulted from the July scandal. No bill moved out of committee.





On 31 July 2007, after the Democrats obtained control of the Congress in the November 2006 election, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced HR 3221, a "bill to provide needed housing reform and for other purposes." Among other things, the bill granted the newly formed Federal Housing Finance Agency "supervisory and regulatory authority over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the federal home loan banks (enterprises)" (per CRS analysis).
Pelosi's bill became Public Law 110-289 on 30 July 2008.

So what you are saying is that during the time the Republicans held control over congress they were responsible for the legislation and actions that were taken? I can agree with that, but try and use that same logic when speaking about the present.

Yes, in 2008 after the subprime mortgage crisis had already begun decimating the US economy this bill was passed. In fact its' stated goal was to "address the subprime mortgage crisis". Address a crisis after it became a crisis.

As opposed to the GOP tactic of giving lip service to addressing a crisis and blocking all reform in committee until it becomes a crisis and then leaving it up to others to address the crisis after it became a crisis.

 

[edthecynic]

The immaturity of leftist individuals never ceases to astound me. Since you are so obviously educated on recent history which party, preceding the multi-billion dollar accounting scandals that rocked the government backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, resisted any and all regulation or auditing of these institutions that undeniably caused the housing crisis that resulted in the economic recession we are still fighting against?

The Bush recession? You are a disingenuous, ill-informed, childish partisan.

Are you talking about the regulations and audits that never got out of the GOP controlled committees??? Or are you talking about the Pelosi bill that was the only reform that became law???

Republican Congress Talked About Financial Reform, But Did Nothing

In 2003, Republicans controlled both branches of Congress (108th) and the White House. What happened to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac regulatory reform under Republican leadership? Nothing.
Here's what I found when I searched THOMAS for the phrase Fannie Mae for the 108th Congress (2003-2004): eight bills .... but only six appear to relate to this topic, per their title. Of those six, only one was introduced after the White House weighed in (at least rhetorically) in September ... and the prime sponsor of that bill was a Democrat. The other bills seem to have resulted from the July scandal. No bill moved out of committee.





On 31 July 2007, after the Democrats obtained control of the Congress in the November 2006 election, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced HR 3221, a "bill to provide needed housing reform and for other purposes." Among other things, the bill granted the newly formed Federal Housing Finance Agency "supervisory and regulatory authority over Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the federal home loan banks (enterprises)" (per CRS analysis).
Pelosi's bill became Public Law 110-289 on 30 July 2008.

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - NYTimes.com

But wait, WHO told us these actions were not needed because these institutions were sound and there was no cause for concern? Go Google it.

Proof of how worthless a "recomendation" is!

But wait, WHO controlled the committees that blocked those actions that were so unsound and such a great cause for concern. I'll save you the trouble of googling it, the GOP had majority control of all committees!

 

[editec]

Just like

increased gov't spending and increased debt

funny how that works

Repeatedly lowering taxes is what caused the deficit/debt.

We stopped making the People pay for the government they were getting. That's what caused the debt.

Gee, lets think about this...
If we were to take 100% of the money that the richest people in America have...just flat out SEIZE IT...that STILL wouldn't be enough to cover the entitlement programs that we've obligated ourselves to. But you think the problem isn't "spending too much"...you think the problem is the we aren't "taxing enough"?

The total valuation of all Assets in the US is estimated to be $188 TRILLION dollars.

So obviously if we nationalized all the assets of the weathiest Americans, we could more than pay the national debt off with PLENTY to spare.

Obvious also is that such a plan is not only stupid, but evil.

So I THINK what you must have meant to say is

If we were to take 100% of the annual reported income that the richest people in America for ONE YEAR...just flat out SEIZE IT...that STILL wouldn't be enough.

I might be wrong of course, and if I am wrong, and you wrote exactly what you meant to say, then please excuse me.

But the total assets of the richest Americans DWARFS even a number like our enormous nation debt.

 

[edthecynic]

Along with the 20,000,000 jobs he created, you could get away with it under those circumstances.

But only if St Ronnie was president for 13 years!!!!

I guess you have given up on that whole Bush recession thing?

Is this Non Sequitur Day???