Bush Tax Cuts Were For The Rich

For a very long time we have heard the Democrats lie about the Bush tax cuts. They always characterize those cuts as tax cuts for the rich. In reality, the middle class and those who pay no taxes made out better than any other group and the rich still pay most of the taxes in this country. That has not stopped Democrats from describing the tax cuts as cuts for Bush’s rich friends.

The Bush tax cuts are set to expire which should not be a problem because the tax cuts were only for the rich. The Democrats have no problem raising taxes, especially on the rich, so allowing the tax cuts to expire and thereby raising the taxes of the rich should be a no brainer for Democrats.

But this is an election year so reality is setting in. The Democrats are now discussing extending the tax cuts for the middle class. In June Steny Hoyer said that tax increases would eventually be necessary in order to get our debt under control but that he expected Congress to temporarily extend the middle class tax cuts:

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Tuesday that tax increases will eventually be necessary to address the nation’s mounting debt, raising a difficult election-year issue as Democrats fight retain control of Congress.

~snip~

Tax cuts enacted under former President George W. Bush are scheduled to expire at the end of the year, affecting taxpayers at every income level. President Barack Obama proposes to permanently extend them for individuals making less than $200,000 a year and families making less than $250,000—at a cost of about $2.5 trillion over the next decade. Breitbart

So there you have it, an admission from a Democrat that the Bush tax cuts were not for the rich. The middle class had cuts as well as demonstrated by Hoyer. Certainly the rich had their taxes cut, everyone who pays taxes did (and those who do not got rebates and credits) and since they pay most of the taxes theirs went down as well.

So the next time a Democrat claims the tax cuts were for the rich ask him what he would say if it were an election year.

And while we are busting myths, let us look at the idea that tax cuts do not stimulate the economy. Democrats believe that taxing (especially the rich) is the way to pay the bills and that cutting taxes does not stimulate the economy.

They believe that until there is an election ahead at which time they talk about tax cuts to stimulate the economy. With regard to the middle class tax cut extension:

“What you want to do is stimulate at this point in time, so you certainly do not want to increase taxes on the middle class, middle-income working Americans,” Hoyer told reporters. Reuters

What you want to do is stimulate so you CERTAINLY DO NOT want to raise taxes.

This rests the case. Tax cuts, not tax increases, stimulate the economy.

If they would have practiced this instead of passing a trillion dollar stimulus we would be well on our way to recovery.

Rush Limbaugh laid out that plan and Obama should have listened.

Speaking of Limbaugh, where is the outrage from liberals who get their panties in a wad when conservatives talk about people and death?

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

3 Responses to “Bush Tax Cuts Were For The Rich”

  1. Blake says:

    You know that we could have our debt pretty much under control if we
    1)- defunded the Healthscare bill,
    2)- defunded the financial regulation bill,
    3)- clawed back the stimulus from AIG and Goldman Sachs, and got the rest of the money from the automakers-
    4)- Actually CREATED viable, private sector jobs that OMITTED any union involvement with what, if any money left or clawed back from the banks,
    5)- and lastly, LEFT THE BANKS AND THE FMs to succeed or fail on their own.
    Only when the pols in Washington realize that when they meddle in the private sector, all that is possible for them to do is F**k things up- there is NO POSSIBLE OUTCOME other than tragedy that can result from government involvement.

  2. Roger says:

    Using The dreaded 1040EZ. The bane of April 15th tax forms found on the IRS site
    Looking at the form, I used a married couple making $50,000 in adjusted wages.

    So, let’s take a look at the Clintax era.
    Year Taxes Owed
    1994-$9053
    1996-$8780
    1998-$8488
    2000-$8293

    Now for the Bush Years
    Year Taxes Owed
    2002-$7289
    2004-$6789
    2006-2009 $6669

    Myth Busted! That is almost a $200.00 a month pay raise!

    Now you just hold on to your horses! Everyone knows that a family that makes 50K a year is RICH!

    Yes, you are so right, I have no idea what I was doing at that moment. So, here is the amount of taxes owed by a family making only $30,000 in adjusted wages.

    Year Taxes Owed
    1994-$4504
    1996-$4504
    1998-$4504
    2000-$4995

    Year Taxes Owed
    2002-$3904
    2004-$3789
    2006-2009 $3669

    Feel free to take it and look up any of the other numbers on the official forms.
    Now who are you going to thank?

    • Schatzee says:

      Well done – and kudos to anyone who can bear to look at a tax form when they are not doing their own (and cussing loudly while doing so). I don’t think I could have done it so I appreciate the work. Really shows how these tax cuts were helping average people – you know those of us who should vacation in the gulf and can’t afford the lobster in Maine…