In the American political theatre, there is one simple fact that is predictable, never-ending, and irrefutable regardless of the party in power or state of the nation. It does not matter how many millions of Americans are out of work, what shape the economy is in, or the level of record corporate profits, Republicans claim cutting taxes for the super-rich creates wealth and jobs for Americans.
On April 16, 2001, then President George W. Bush said that, “Tax relief will create new jobs, tax relief will generate new wealth, and tax relief will open new opportunities.” If Bush’s remarks from 10 years ago sound familiar, it’s because Republicans are still parroting the fallacious notion that giving tax cuts to the wealthy is good for America. It is important to understand who George W. Bush was selling his snake-oil economic policy to, because the audience definitely benefitted from what is now known as the Bush tax cuts.
Bush was speaking to the United States Chamber of Commerce, and his message was meant to reassure and reward the corporate world who is the only group that enjoyed economic prosperity from the tax cuts that began hurting the American economy a decade ago this week. Bush was full of praise for his audience when he said, “I’m especially honored to be able to speak to the folks who really help our economy grow, the entrepreneurs, the business folks of America, the employers, the risk takers, the people who really work hard to realize the great American Dream.” Bush was correct in saying the business community realizes the American dream, but they have not helped the economy grow or worked hard for their wealth that comes at the expense of the working-class’s tax dollars. The wealthiest Americans have benefitted from tax cuts and special tax privileges that 95% of Americans will never experience. However, it is the incessant Republican claim that tax cuts for the wealthy create jobs that is most infuriating because it is erroneous and there is sufficient empirical evidence to refute the oft-claimed assertion.
The number of American jobs in June 2001 when the Bush tax cuts were signed into law was 132 million and within three years the number shrank to 131.4 million; it signaled the worst cycle since 1945 and belied the talking point that tax cuts spur job creation. Indeed, for the ten-year period after Bush’s tax cuts were passed, growth in investment, GDP, and employment were at lower performance levels than during any post-war era period. During the Clinton presidency, job growth was 16.2% compared to 4.8% during the Bush years. The news was not all negative though, because the wealthiest 1% of Americans realized a 65% income gain between 2002 and 2007 while average household income was lower than in 2000. It is not enough that the richest 2% of Americans increased their wealth at the expense of working-class Americans who were going backwards economically, but the tax cuts increased the national debt from $5.6 trillion to $10 trillion and the Republicans are not through destroying the economy yet.
The recent Republican budget that passed the House, in conjunction with a Republican jobs plan released last week, proposes to further reduce the top tax rate by 10%, and Republicans claim their cuts will “Increase American competitiveness to spur investment and create more American jobs.” House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said that, “Just because we proposed it in the past doesn’t mean it was not a good idea.” Boehner must be spending too much time at the bars or in a tanning bed, because the past tax cuts and Republican economic plans under Bush were horrible ideas for working-class Americans, but were very good ideas for corporations and the wealthy who own them, and the Republicans are not through yet.
Former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, a Republican candidate for the presidency in 2012, proposed a massive $7.8 trillion tax cut over ten years that represents Republican largesse with the middle class’s tax dollars. Pawlenty’s proposal calls for a tax increase on the middle class to help pay for a personal income tax cut of at least 41% for the wealthiest Americans. He also proposes completely eliminating the estate tax, capital gains tax, and tax on dividend income that benefits only the wealthiest 2% of Americans. The Minnesota maniac also places a cap on spending the will mean drastic cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid but does not include any cuts or cap on defense spending. Mr. Pawlenty’s plan also cuts the oil industry and corporate tax rate by more than 50% in spite of the fact that many of the largest corporations and oil companies pay no taxes at all.
The Republicans are on pace to take the paychecks of working Americans and hand them directly to the wealthiest Americans and their corporations. If Americans are outraged by the Heritage Foundation’s Path to Prosperity that Rep. Paul Ryan proposed, eliminating Medicare will be the least of their problems compared to Pawlenty’s proposal. The Pawlenty plan appears to be more ambitious than Republicans admit to, but they are in agreement that allowing the wealthiest Americans and corporations to rape all the wealth from the 95% of Americans who are not filthy rich is a good idea whose time has come. Why wouldn’t the Republicans propose such outrageous tax cut proposals? For ten years Republicans have convinced their poor, ignorant supporters that giving all of American’s tax dollars and wealth to the rich will create jobs, help the economy, and eventually trickle down to the rest of the population.
Since the recession began in 2008, the wealthy and corporations have posted record profits and increased revenue but they have hoarded the increased wealth while nearly every economic segment of the population has lost income and jobs. As Americans struggle to survive, Republicans propose giving more to the wealthy and corporations and are convincing their supporters that it will spur investment and create jobs. However, it has not worked for ten years and will not work in another ten, twenty, or a thousand years and Republicans know it. At some point, Americans must realize that Republicans are liars. The Bush-era tax cuts, coupled with deregulation of financial institutions were the cause of the aptly labeled Great Recession, and although Americans continue to suffer from Republican economic malfeasance, they still consider their plans good ideas.
As Americans celebrate the inauspicious anniversary of the Bush tax cuts that are responsible for devastating the economy and driving up the national debt, Republicans are poised to make the previous ten years look like an economic picnic. The American people are losing jobs and economic security because Republicans only know to cut taxes for the wealthy and corporations and have the audacity to claim tax cuts are good for the economy. After 10 years, Republicans cannot claim their economic policies need more time to reach fruition and benefit the population, but they keep trying. Invariably, there are Republican devotees who will end up in dire poverty waiting for the tax cuts to create jobs and help the economy and it is a tragedy that their stupidity will contribute to the destruction of America. The Republicans in power though, know exactly what their devastating economic policies have done to this country, and as they continue their failed course, will count their campaign donations all the way to changing America into a private corporate enterprise. The tragedy is that it only took ten years to destroy 235 years of American progress.
PoliticusUSA
G+
Facebook
Shiva (Moderator)
Jun. 8th, 2011 at 10:04 pm
THIS is where the traitorous tea bags need to say I want my country back. This is where they should put baby jebus, chewing tobacco, fake bibles and their guns down and take their country back.
Instead they fall for the medicare scam, the social security scam, and every other scam perpetrated by the republicans. CUT THEM! No, dont cut them, honor your own citizens that deserve what they have and stop the republican moves to shift all wealth to the richest end of the spectrum. Any person who isnt in the rich seats needs to be out of their head upset over this.
Hey tea bags, this means you get taxed too! Want less taxes? You are now paying for the rich. Your taxes will go up and you remain faithfully kneeling at the feet of the gop while sputtering “but but but the constitution!”. The Koch brothers have trained you well. Worry about abortion, worry about NPR, all the while Boehner is raising your taxes while Obama had you at the lowest tax rate of your life. Well done bags birthers and bores.
As for myself, we cant get them out of there soon enough. If you are running low on money you don’t just cut back you increase revenues. Nothing the republicans do works. Nothing.
loading...
RealityDose
Jun. 9th, 2011 at 8:27 am
Naturally, in your parallel universe the Democrats ignoring the regulators’ warnings about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac well before their collapse had nothing to do with the financial crisis. Carter and Clinton’s Community Redevelopment Act that forced banks to give loans to those that could not afford to pay them back also had NOTHING to do with it. Giving away FREE money, taxpayer money, while also helping themselves to it (Raines, Gorelick, etc.) similarly had NOTHING to do with the crisis. Stop pretending the Democrats had nothing to do with the financial crisis! They have blood on their hands big time. Just check the record. It wasn’t Bush who blocked regulatory reform before the crisis. It was the Democrats and Barney Frank who “rolled the dice!” How did that work out for us?
loading...
Shiva (Moderator)
Jun. 9th, 2011 at 9:40 am
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/21admin.html
“Mr. Bush did foresee the danger posed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored mortgage finance giants. The president spent years pushing a recalcitrant Congress to toughen regulation of the companies, but was unwilling to compromise when his former Treasury secretary wanted to cut a deal. And the regulator Mr. Bush chose to oversee them — an old prep school buddy — pronounced the companies sound even as they headed toward insolvency.”
And he pushed to allow first-time buyers to qualify for federally insured mortgages with no money down. Republican Congressional leaders and some housing advocates balked, arguing that homeowners with no stake in their investments would be more prone to walk away, as Mr. West did. Many economic experts, including some in the White House, now share that view.
“This administration made decisions that allowed the free market to operate as a barroom brawl instead of a prize fight,” said L. William Seidman, who advised Republican presidents and led the savings and loan bailout in the 1990s. “To make the market work well, you have to have a lot of rules.”
But Mr. Bush populated the financial system’s alphabet soup of oversight agencies with people who, like him, wanted fewer rules, not more.
A soft-spoken Texan, Mr. Falcon ran the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, a tiny government agency that oversaw Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two pillars of the American housing industry. In February 2003, he was finishing a blockbuster report that warned the pillars could crumble.
Created by Congress, Fannie and Freddie — called G.S.E.’s, for government-sponsored entities — bought trillions of dollars’ worth of mortgages to hold or sell to investors as guaranteed securities. The companies were also Washington powerhouses, stuffing lawmakers’ campaign coffers and hiring bare-knuckled lobbyists.
Mr. Falcon’s report outlined a worst-case situation in which Fannie and Freddie could default on debt, setting off “contagious illiquidity in the market” — in other words, a financial meltdown. He also raised red flags about the companies’ soaring use of derivatives, the complex financial instruments that economic experts now blame for spreading the housing collapse.
Today, the White House cites that report — and its subsequent effort to better regulate Fannie and Freddie — as evidence that it foresaw the crisis and tried to avert it. Bush officials recently wrote up a talking points memo headlined “G.S.E.’s — We Told You So.”
But the back story is more complicated. To begin with, on the day Mr. Falcon issued his report, the White House tried to fire him.
At the time, Fannie and Freddie were allies in the president’s quest to drive up homeownership rates; Franklin D. Raines, then Fannie’s chief executive, has fond memories of visiting Mr. Bush in the Oval Office and flying aboard Air Force One to a housing event. “They loved us,” he said.
So when Mr. Falcon refused to deep-six his report, Mr. Raines took his complaints to top Treasury officials and the White House. “I’m going to do what I need to do to defend my company and my position,” Mr. Raines told Mr. Falcon.
Days later, as Mr. Falcon was in New York preparing to deliver a speech about his findings, his cellphone rang. It was the White House personnel office, he said, telling him he was about to be unemployed.
His warnings were buried in the next day’s news coverage, trumped by the White House announcement that Mr. Bush would replace Mr. Falcon, a Democrat appointed by Bill Clinton, with Mark C. Brickell, a leader in the derivatives industry that Mr. Falcon’s report had flagged.
Bush. 99% of the housing drop
loading...
Mike
Jun. 11th, 2011 at 11:01 am
This is a great article,factual and leads the reader over a 10 year cycle of what,why,who,and how. I for one will be passing it on to hundreds. I hope American workers wake up one day to see how they are being abused.
Wealthy Republicans want it all, maybe to the point that the LOWER 95% “other” Americans,as they see it, will indeed have a job. A job with no rights,no say, and minimum wage, what we, who work in that world, call a service job. A servent society in short. We, the 95% of Americans can then be at the top 5% Wage takers will, to do some the following work for them,pool cleaning,washing thier Bentlys,cutting their grass,serving their food,etc. All the while 95% of the workers, will be fighting each other, for those said service jobs, with no benifits (cost to many taxes)and keep the wages ever lower. This America could end up Paradise for the rich 5% and HELL until you work yourself to death and many workers thrown away for the benifit of the few Republican Wealthy.
American forgot over the centuries that is one of the main reasons our forfathers (we) came here, to escape that type of society. While we 85% work,(10% unemployeed due to above article as stated)the top 5% Republicans spew Propoganda and yes lies too to fool just enough to win position (Mayors, congressmen,and presidents)and become the bought mouthpieace of the top 5%. A perfect storm, until we meager 95%(I am one of these and proud of it)vote in an evil Democrat to represent the 95%(because the 10% unemployed need benifits republicans do not want them to have, as an example,and try to keep,wages,social security,retierment,and other benifits in place.
The Wealthy will always be wealthy! Even the Republicans like Madoff will still be wealthy, if he ever gets out of jail. We all know too that there are many up there just like him finding ways to take more from us 95%ers.
I know that I do not speak for all 95% workers and there are those 10to20% that are republican want-a- be’s and vote that way. Those poor 10 to20% souls are just ignorant and indoctranated to the republican doctrine of hate,divide,mistrust,and HOPE. The unreachable HOPE that we lowly 95% can reach that soul-less penical of the 5%. As a comparison for we the worker, on the job site many want to become a supervisor. Approxmatly 90% of the workforce struggle against each other for 10%(approx.) of the managements job,and Bosses pick out of that pool those who will sell there souls to the company and do their bidding.
We as American workers have an answer for all that, instead of fighting each other for the few jobs,come together and fight to make our jobs worth staying in. Will we take from the rich, YES, and as God as my wittness Americans labor is worth more than we make now in many areas.
If republicans do not want taxes, to pay their fair share is all we ask, then get out and find a tax haven somewhere else.
We Americans can live without no tax paying republicans. I want good roads,water,police,fire,health,defense,and economy etc.and it simly takes taxes to do it. Childern need to be fed,our injured vets/officers/firefighters need the best care we have period. Our old need to live reirement and last days in dignity and it takes taxes.
I do not care about the teabagger republican want-a-be or the rich republican 5% because they will always be OK. I care about the majority who built and contine to build and maintain this country,the American worker.
10% or so of American workers(The organized) are struggling to keep good jobs,wages and benifits fo all American workers not just themselves. When we organize a larger portion of the workforce over the Propoganda,legislation,screams,lies,of corporate America and the the Republicans who control them,we can stop the systematic destruction of American worklife by the “Lower Tax” crap of the Bought and paid for Republicans.
loading...
Andy
Jun. 11th, 2011 at 9:00 pm
This makes a very good point. Taking money away from the rich, or your employers, is a great way to spur economic growth. I’m sure that all your bosses are going to be willing to give you exponentially higher wages and increase the number of people they employ when most of their money is being taken. The author of this article completely ignores the other reasons for his statistics (ie. the tech boom under Clinton, Bushes inept economic policies and extreme overspending) which contributed to the economy. Interestingly enough, when Clinton raised taxes in I believe 1993, tax income didn’t increase at all and our economy was stagnant. It wasn’t until 1997 when he cut capital gains taxes the the economy started to boom. It is also interesting to note that the president you all worship never ran a surplus, he just used a silly word game that all our politicians do. Under Clinton the debt rose 1.4 trillion. He also robbed money from the Social Security Fund to make his so called surplus’s look bigger. Oops. I also don’t understand where you all get your sense of entitlement. Why do you feel you deserve to be provided for by the government? Why should we reward people who recklessly spend their money in their youth with free cash (social security) and free medical care when they are older. Live life frugally and think towards the future by saving and investing and you shouldn’t need free handouts. I understand that sometimes people mess up and don’t think ahead, if you are really in a jam that is what charity is for, not the government. The only role of the government in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, not a guarantee of it. Here is a better idea, how about instead of jamming up taxes on your employers, the rich, how about cutting taxes for everyone.? Let people reap the fruit of their labor and they will be that much more productive. Stop letting people live off of government handouts and they will have the incentive to go out and get a job. Let everyone keep more of their money and they will go out and spend more of it. You all act like the rich deserve to give their money to the government. They earned it just like you did, so why should they have to pay for people who were to lazy or to stupid to save while they were young? Why should they be responsible for everyone else? Taxing the bajezers out of the rich to provide for the poor only works until the rich get tired of working the butts off and decide to get a low paying job as a cashier. If you need any proof of low taxes across the board working, look at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/world/americas/08iht-letter.3.20678052.html.
loading...
Shiva (Moderator)
Jun. 11th, 2011 at 9:13 pm
Great talking points. Go out and get a job. The very people you defend so rigorously are not hiring. What you advocate is a class of poor so poor they will starve.
You should know that among the rich, only 2% of them provide jobs. Even the traitor Boehner has admitted this. SO that part of your post is meaningless.
Just another anti American who defends the rich and wants the poor starving on the side of the road.
loading...
Andy
Jun. 12th, 2011 at 1:52 am
“anti american” ha. What idea of America are you talking about? The one that our country was founded on? Thea ideas set forth in the constitution, something Obama has sworn to defend? Our founders would be rolling over in their graves if they saw America today. Go read you history and find out what it means to be an American, I’ll tell you what, its not your warped sense of entitlement. What made America great, a hard working, charitable group of people. No one would advocate for a “class of poor so they will starve” I find it hard to believe that anyone, no matter how misguided, could draw that from my post. If you honestly believe that the majority of the people can’t get a job and can’t get enough money to buy food, then you clearly don’t live in America. I doubt you even read my first post though, you just puppet everything a mindless liberal says when they can’t respond.
loading...
Andy
Jun. 11th, 2011 at 9:02 pm
sorry, not at that link http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2003/08/the-historical-lessons-of-lower-tax-rates
and about Clinton http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16
loading...