Online Now 1335

The Bucknuts Hot Spot

The place to be for topics too hot for any place else

On this Board 52
Record: 9642 (12/28/2012)

Online now 1241
Record: 10904 (2/4/2012)

Boards ▾

The Front Row

The place to discuss inside information, the latest rumors and scoop on the Buckeyes

Around the 'Shoe

Anything and everything football related that has to do with your Buckeyes

The Best Damn Recruiting Board

If it's football recruiting, OSU-style, it's cussed and discussed here

Bucknutin' But Net

Talk a little Buckeye basketball with your fellow Ohio State hoopsters

The Bucknuts Hot Spot

The place to be for topics too hot for any place else

The Buckeye Babe Thread

Share your favorite pix, a special lady in your life or someone else's life

Reply

POTUS: TAX CUTTER

  • Obama the Silent Tax Cutter

    You wouldn’t know it, but he’s cut taxes more than George W. Bush did in his first term. But Obama doesn’t get credit because he hasn’t cut income taxes as broadly as Bush and Reagan did, says Eleanor Clift.

    The one thing most voters know about President Obama is that he wants to raise taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations. Republicans have blocked him at every turn, but he continues to talk about changing public policy so that billionaires pay more.

    Obama has invested so much time demonizing the Bush-era tax cuts for the rich that he has obscured the true narrative of his presidency. Class-war rhetoric aside, Obama is one of the most prolific tax cutters in recent history, with a record that puts him squarely alongside that of George W. Bush.

    Crunching the numbers at the liberal think tank the Center for American Progress, analyst Michael Linden found that if one compares the cost of tax cuts in just the first four years of Bush’s term (2001–04) to the first four years of Obama's (2009–12), Obama’s tax cuts are bigger. The value of the Bush tax cuts were about $475 billion in those first four years, or about 1.1 percent of GDP. Obama’s total about $1 trillion, or 1.6 percent of GDP.

    Obama has cut taxes to lower levels than Bush did, says Linden. This is because, of course, Obama thus far has extended all of the Bush tax cuts and then cut taxes on top of that. His original stimulus bill in 2009 had $290 billion in Making Work Pay tax cuts. His speech Thursday night before Congress advocated for another $175 billion in payroll tax cuts, which come on top of $110 billion from last December’s budget deal. Speeded-up expensing for business adds another $10 billion or so.

    All in all, Obama is responsible for many billions in tax cuts, yet the popular perception is that he has raised taxes.

    “It drives me crazy,” says Michael Ettlinger, vice president for economic policy at the Center for American Progress. “People have this bizarre notion he’s raised taxes when he’s a big tax cutter.” Ettlinger says the White House is guilty of “political malpractice” by getting caught up in a discussion about extending the Bush tax cuts when rhetorically it could have focused on extending the Obama tax cuts in the Recovery Act that were expiring at the same time.

    Unlike the Bush tax cuts, which were served up in a single wallop on April 15, the Obama tax cuts are what economist Jared Bernstein calls “slow drip.” Paychecks fluctuate enough that workers didn’t really notice the boost in take-home pay of roughly $1,000 over the year. In three months, if Congress does nothing to extend the payroll tax cut, every paycheck will shrink, a message Obama will be taking to the voters as he presses for passage of the American Jobs Act.

    Obama may finally have beaten Republicans at their own game. A party that prides itself on advocating for tax cuts will have a hard time lining up against the extension of the payroll tax and other business sweeteners larded into the jobs bill. Obama’s embrace of tax cuts seems to fly in the face of Democratic orthodoxy, but liberal economists say the president’s approach has been much more strategic and is about trying to get money into the pockets of the middle class to boost the economy.

    “It doesn’t come from the same place as Bush or Reagan, whose economic philosophy is no tax is a good tax, and that particularly targeted tax cuts for wealthy individuals and corporations brought good things,” says Chuck Marr, director of federal tax policy at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

    Obama doesn’t get credit for the tax cuts he has put in place, in part because he hasn’t cut income taxes broadly, as Bush and Reagan did. There’s also what economist Bernstein calls the Republican noise machine. Bernstein was at the White House working for Vice President Biden until earlier this year, and he points out how the Republicans are always complaining about the high corporate tax rate, which was in place well before Obama took office. “It has nothing to do with President Obama, but people associate it with him,” says Bernstein.

    The political branding of Obama as just another tax-and-spend liberal has been effective, despite facts that tell a different story. The GOP portrays the health-care reform legislation as a job-killing bill that raises taxes. Repealing the Affordable Care Act is a centerpiece of every Republican’s campaign rhetoric. The legislation does raise taxes but not until 2018, and then on taxpayers who earn more than $250,000. There will also be a tax on so-called Cadillac care, or insurance plans that cost $25,000 or more. “Republicans act as if it started yesterday and hit everybody,” says Bernstein.

    Maybe that’s the rub. Obama may be a bigger tax cutter than Bush for the moment, but looking ahead 10 years, as the Center for American Progress did, if you take all of Obama’s specific proposals and add them up, his total net tax cuts come to about $2.2 trillion, less than the $2.3 trillion cost over 10 years of the Bush tax cuts. Based on Obama’s Thursday night speech and positions he has taken before, the president sees tax cutting as a temporary tool to get the economy going again, not as an economic philosophy.

    dave1954

  • But wait a minute, the crazies on here like you have droned on and on and on and on about how tax cuts ruined the economy, and how they dont help at all, about how the idiot George Bush used them as stealing elections how they are the single sole reason for our debt and deficits.

    Now you are for tax cuts because some partisian far left web site used statistics to show Obama cuts taxes more than Bush and how he also cut taxes without cutting spendings the same amount just like Bush?

    Thank you for posting this article, it proves my point that there is very little difference between Bush and Obama, they are one in the same of failed leadership we have had in this country. Nice job Dave

    gpracer73

  • If I thought for a moment that president O was a religious man, I would suggest that he thank the Almighty every day and night for people like Dave 1954...cuz that's all he has...people like Dave1954.

    csoto47

  • gpracer73 said...

    But wait a minute, the crazies on here like you have droned on and on and on and on about how tax cuts ruined the economy, and how they dont help at all, about how the idiot George Bush used them as stealing elections how they are the single sole reason for our debt and deficits.

    Now you are for tax cuts because some partisian far left web site used statistics to show Obama cuts taxes more than Bush and how he also cut taxes without cutting spendings the same amount just like Bush?

    Thank you for posting this article, it proves my point that there is very little difference between Bush and Obama, they are one in the same of failed leadership we have had in this country. Nice job Dave

    Tax cuts/credits were used by Obama to help stimulate the economy. They were targeted to help put disposable income in the hands of the lower 90% of wage earners and to help small businesses and encourage them to hire. During severe recessions the only way out is to encourage spending and if there is not enough private sector spending then the government has to spend.

    We are seeing the results of cutting spending including cuts in safety net programs during a serious recession. That is what most of Europe is doing. They are actually doing the austerity program that the repubs are proposing - and you see how that is working for them.

    You completely mischaracterize the libs position on taxes unless by crazies you do not mean libs like me. You have never seen me or Dave suggest that we end Bush's tax cuts to the bottom 98%. I and most libs are for those tax cuts continuing, though I was not real high on them when they were passed. I am only in favor of keeping them now due to the nature of the economy and the fact that we need the masses to spend now to create a demand that will lead to jobs. It is the regressiveness of W's income tax cuts that I was opposed to. Did the Bush tax cut contribute to the deficit? Of course it did including the portion given to the middle class. You take a cut in pay, the money available or your household budget goes down.

    Though often asked, God does not take sides in politics or college football.

    TimMcM ●

  • csoto47 said...

    If I thought for a moment that president O was a religious man, I would suggest that he thank the Almighty every day and night for people like Dave 1954...cuz that's all he has...people like Dave1954.

    And the country would be better off if the President had people like you? roflmao

    Though often asked, God does not take sides in politics or college football.

    TimMcM ●

  • TIM, what is wrong with the government letting us have more of our own money? Lol , Damn the way you act one would think it belongs to the government and not the individual making it.

    NUTTYBAR

  • TimMcM said...

    Tax cuts/credits were used by Obama to help stimulate the economy. They were targeted to help put disposable income in the hands of the lower 90% of wage earners and to help small businesses and encourage them to hire. During severe recessions the only way out is to encourage spending and if there is not enough private sector spending then the government has to spend.

    We are seeing the results of cutting spending including cuts in safety net programs during a serious recession. That is what most of Europe is doing. They are actually doing the austerity program that the repubs are proposing - and you see how that is working for them.

    You completely mischaracterize the libs position on taxes unless by crazies you do not mean libs like me. You have never seen me or Dave suggest that we end Bush's tax cuts to the bottom 98%. I and most libs are for those tax cuts continuing, though I was not real high on them when they were passed. I am only in favor of keeping them now due to the nature of the economy and the fact that we need the masses to spend now to create a demand that will lead to jobs. It is the regressiveness of W's income tax cuts that I was opposed to. Did the Bush tax cut contribute to the deficit? Of course it did including the portion given to the middle class. You take a cut in pay, the money available or your household budget goes down.

    Tim

    bush also used tax cuts to stimulate the economy during the recession when he entered office, this was even in the article you posted about Obama turning around the economy, are you trying to say the difference between Obama and Bush is Obama used it for economic stimulas and Bush didnt?

    I would hope you are one of the few smart ones here that dont buy into the conspiracy theory of bush only used them to steal a election?

    I never said bush tax cuts didnt add to the debt/deficit, his mistake was he didnt cut spending to matcht eh cuts, but some of the far left on here have been saying the Bush tax cuts ruined the economy and caused the recession at the end of his term, that is plain crazy, cant figure out how giving more moeny to consumers can cause a recession but I guess I am not a economist.

    Are you blaming the economy in europe on the fact that some countries have went the austerity route? seriously? Like I siad above I am not a economist but I am also not naive enough to pin a 4 year world wide recession on a few countries trying some austerity measures. there are plenty of examples where the austerity program is working very well, go llok at Sweedens numbers recently, that program is working very well. Germany as well to an extent etc.

    Once again, you did not refute or change my opinion that there is little to no difference between Obama and Bush, this article is just one of the items that they used the same tools and ideas and I find it funny that it was posted by one of the far left loonies on here and he doesnt even realize what he posted really says

    gpracer73

  • gpracer73 said...

    But wait a minute, the crazies on here like you have droned on and on and on and on about how tax cuts ruined the economy, and how they dont help at all, about how the idiot George Bush used them as stealing elections how they are the single sole reason for our debt and deficits.

    Now you are for tax cuts because some partisian far left web site used statistics to show Obama cuts taxes more than Bush and how he also cut taxes without cutting spendings the same amount just like Bush?

    Thank you for posting this article, it proves my point that there is very little difference between Bush and Obama, they are one in the same of failed leadership we have had in this country. Nice job Dave

    Actually you are full of it. I don't like unfair tax cuts for the top 1%. There is a difference that even you can see.

    And saying Bush and Obama are the same is a really stupid statement. Did Obama start a war and leave 2 wars for his successor?
    Did Obama have a massive tax cut during the time of war?
    Did Obama leave an economy leaking 750,000 jobs a month fr his successor?
    Did Bush fight for equal rights for women's pay?
    Did Bush fight for equal rights for ALL citizens?
    Did Obama out a CIA spy because her husband found out about the Bush Admin. lies?

    See, they are a lot different!

    dave1954

  • dave1954 said...

    Actually you are full of it. I don't like unfair tax cuts for the top 1%. There is a difference that even you can see.

    And saying Bush and Obama are the same is a really stupid statement. Did Obama start a war and leave 2 wars for his successor? Did Obama have a massive tax cut during the time of war? Did Obama leave an economy leaking 750,000 jobs a month fr his successor? Did Bush fight for equal rights for women's pay? Did Bush fight for equal rights for ALL citizens? Did Obama out a CIA spy because her husband found out about the Bush Admin. lies?

    See, they are a lot different!

    unfair tax cuts to whom? who decides what is fair and what is not? Bush tax cuts helped the majority well under the 1% but I know your too lazy to research, easier to read a op ed piece and run with it.

    Let's look at the similiarities

    Big bank bail out? Tarp - Proposed by Bush and tweked and implemented by Obama
    Fed Reserve money games? Started under Bush Obama continued
    GM and Chrysler bail outs? Started by Bush enhanced and done by Obama
    Iraq withdrawl? Bush singed the agreement with the Iraqi govt, Obama did not change a thing and followed the plan and actually had Clinton negotiating to stay longer
    Afghanistan troop surge? Started by Bush and enhanced by Obama
    Tax cuts, Started by Bush continued by Obama and even enhanced upon.
    Sending military into another country? yep, Bush did it and Obama did it, Libya
    Stimulas? yep bush did it early while in his recession giving out cash, Obama did it during his recession to a different degree but both the stimulas.
    Gitmo? Bush kept it and Obama kept it
    Adding to the Debt/deficit? yep both are good at that.

    but you are right, I am the fool that sees the huge difference between the two, gotcha, what is it like to be so blinded by partisian politics? and not having a independent thought, just going along with the sheep?

    gpracer73

  • gpracer73 said...

    unfair tax cuts to whom? who decides what is fair and what is not? Bush tax cuts helped the majority well under the 1% but I know your too lazy to research, easier to read a op ed piece and run with it.

    Let's look at the similiarities

    Big bank bail out? Tarp - Proposed by Bush and tweked and implemented by Obama Fed Reserve money games? Started under Bush Obama continued GM and Chrysler bail outs? Started by Bush enhanced and done by Obama Iraq withdrawl? Bush singed the agreement with the Iraqi govt, Obama did not change a thing and followed the plan and actually had Clinton negotiating to stay longer Afghanistan troop surge? Started by Bush and enhanced by Obama Tax cuts, Started by Bush continued by Obama and even enhanced upon. Sending military into another country? yep, Bush did it and Obama did it, Libya Stimulas? yep bush did it early while in his recession giving out cash, Obama did it during his recession to a different degree but both the stimulas. Gitmo? Bush kept it and Obama kept it Adding to the Debt/deficit? yep both are good at that.

    but you are right, I am the fool that sees the huge difference between the two, gotcha, what is it like to be so blinded by partisian politics? and not having a independent thought, just going along with the sheep?

    If I give you $1 and the guy next to you $1000 it helps you, too. Stupid comparison! If it were up to the Republicans, all of them, they would have allowed the auto companies to go under. You look it up.Obama wanted to get rid of the tax cuts but was held hostage over the debt ceiling, something that was never a partisan issue until now. Bush started the damn wars, why didn't he take care of them before he left office? The Afghan war should be over but for the insistence to go into Iraq for his oil buddies. True or false? Look it up. And are you sayong Obama gave tax cuts? I thought he only raised taxes. Some of you Cons haven't gotten the talking points memo from Karl Rove. Obama never sent a troop on the ground in Libya. Remember, Ghadafi was Bush's buddy. GITMO, the Repubs scared the public, lied is a better word, by saying the prisoners would be going to your local prisons. And, of course, the Fox watching public believed it.
    But we agree on one thing, you are a fool.

    dave1954

  • dave1954 said...

    If I give you $1 and the guy next to you $1000 it helps you, too. Stupid comparison! If it were up to the Republicans, all of them, they would have allowed the auto companies to go under. You look it up.Obama wanted to get rid of the tax cuts but was held hostage over the debt ceiling, something that was never a partisan issue until now. Bush started the damn wars, why didn't he take care of them before he left office? The Afghan war should be over but for the insistence to go into Iraq for his oil buddies. True or false? Look it up. And are you sayong Obama gave tax cuts? I thought he only raised taxes. Some of you Cons haven't gotten the talking points memo from Karl Rove. Obama never sent a troop on the ground in Libya. Remember, Ghadafi was Bush's buddy. GITMO, the Repubs scared the public, lied is a better word, by saying the prisoners would be going to your local prisons. And, of course, the Fox watching public believed it. But we agree on one thing, you are a fool.

    The auto companies went Chapter 11 anyway. Under a normal Chap 11 they would have reorganized and dumped their legacy costs and probably been in better shape than they are now.

    pazbuc

  • pazbuc said...

    The auto companies went Chapter 11 anyway. Under a normal Chap 11 they would have reorganized and dumped their legacy costs and probably been in better shape than they are now.

    Probably? Of course you would be willing to take that chance? And the workers would be making far less, less healthcare and no unions. Yep, that's why the Cons wanted them to go under.

    dave1954

  • dave1954 said...

    If I give you $1 and the guy next to you $1000 it helps you, too. Stupid comparison! If it were up to the Republicans, all of them, they would have allowed the auto companies to go under. You look it up.Obama wanted to get rid of the tax cuts but was held hostage over the debt ceiling, something that was never a partisan issue until now. Bush started the damn wars, why didn't he take care of them before he left office? The Afghan war should be over but for the insistence to go into Iraq for his oil buddies. True or false? Look it up. And are you sayong Obama gave tax cuts? I thought he only raised taxes. Some of you Cons haven't gotten the talking points memo from Karl Rove. Obama never sent a troop on the ground in Libya. Remember, Ghadafi was Bush's buddy. GITMO, the Repubs scared the public, lied is a better word, by saying the prisoners would be going to your local prisons. And, of course, the Fox watching public believed it. But we agree on one thing, you are a fool.

    Wow so much misinformation in one post, my god.

    Lets start with the Auto bail out, Dave who started the bailouts? yep you guessed it Mr. Bush, the last time I checked he was a Republican, so I guess you are to Foolish to know that a Republican started the auto bailouts.

    Obama wanted to get rid of the tax cut for people making over 250,000, he did not want to get rid of all the tax cuts, your correct the Republicans played the politic game and Obama caved, more of his stellar leadership just like Bush.

    Let's talk Afghanastan, Obama could have pulled the plug as soon as he was elected, why didnt he? why did he go along with Bush plan of troop surge? why did he try to negotiate with the Iraqis to stay in Iraq but failed so he followed Bush agreement he signed while in office. maybe he also has oil buddies, Not sure why you are trying to trash Bush on Iraq qar with me, have you heard me say I supported it? dont think so, more of your blind partisian game playing I guess

    This one is the funniest one of all of your FOOLISH commentsu , your asking me if I think Obama gave tax cuts? you are the one that posted your little partisian op ed piece that proves Obama did give tax cuts and gave more than Bush did, so Yes Dave, He has given tax cuts, you know the ones you want eliminated but your guy doesnt agree with you I guess, dont blame him, hard to agree with a fool

    Gitmo? you mean Congress scared the public, both Dems and Repubs did not want the prisoners in the state they represent, I know here in Ohio Mr Brown was adament that it would never be moved here, Mt Reid the same with Nevada etc etc. I know you are incabable of a non partisian thought but your revionist history is laughable

    The rest of your partisian rant, I dont watch Fox News, cant stand the talking head mentality of it and MSNBC, if I do watch TV news it would be local or BBC world news, Cant stand the closed minded partisian crap that fools like you fall for hook line and sinker

    gpracer73

  • NUTTYBAR said...

    TIM, what is wrong with the government letting us have more of our own money? Lol , Damn the way you act one would think it belongs to the government and not the individual making it.

    Nice rhetoric, but it runs shallow. Anyone who makes money in this country has an obligation to this country. People do not make money in a vacuum, they take advantage of what this country has to offer including resources paid for by the masses. What company does not have to use the highways, airports, railways, etc. paid for by the public? What business succeeds without workers educated by our public schools. What millionaire has his own police and fire department to protect his business and personal properties? Stop and think what would happen if there there was no EPA, no FDA, etc. I know the GOP/cons can give a flippant answer but would you really want your child taking medicine that only the company that made it okayed it for sale to the public? Then there is the defense of the country, grants for research, etc.

    We need to decide what kind of country we want and then it needs to be paid for.

    Remember that legislators are about 95% reactive rather the proactive. Taxes and regulations come about when either there is a real need for them or when those with power and money decide it would be to their advantage to have something.

    Though often asked, God does not take sides in politics or college football.

    TimMcM ●

  • dave1954 said...

    Probably? Of course you would be willing to take that chance? And the workers would be making far less, less healthcare and no unions. Yep, that's why the Cons wanted them to go under.

    If they had gone under the cars would have been supplied by the other car makers in this country who would have hired more workers to meet the demand. The net employment would have been zero.

    pazbuc

  • gpracer73 said...

    Wow so much misinformation in one post, my god.

    Lets start with the Auto bail out, Dave who started the bailouts? yep you guessed it Mr. Bush, the last time I checked he was a Republican, so I guess you are to Foolish to know that a Republican started the auto bailouts.

    Obama wanted to get rid of the tax cut for people making over 250,000, he did not want to get rid of all the tax cuts, your correct the Republicans played the politic game and Obama caved, more of his stellar leadership just like Bush.

    Let's talk Afghanastan, Obama could have pulled the plug as soon as he was elected, why didnt he? why did he go along with Bush plan of troop surge? why did he try to negotiate with the Iraqis to stay in Iraq but failed so he followed Bush agreement he signed while in office. maybe he also has oil buddies, Not sure why you are trying to trash Bush on Iraq qar with me, have you heard me say I supported it? dont think so, more of your blind partisian game playing I guess

    This one is the funniest one of all of your FOOLISH commentsu , your asking me if I think Obama gave tax cuts? you are the one that posted your little partisian op ed piece that proves Obama did give tax cuts and gave more than Bush did, so Yes Dave, He has given tax cuts, you know the ones you want eliminated but your guy doesnt agree with you I guess, dont blame him, hard to agree with a fool

    Gitmo? you mean Congress scared the public, both Dems and Repubs did not want the prisoners in the state they represent, I know here in Ohio Mr Brown was adament that it would never be moved here, Mt Reid the same with Nevada etc etc. I know you are incabable of a non partisian thought but your revionist history is laughable

    The rest of your partisian rant, I dont watch Fox News, cant stand the talking head mentality of it and MSNBC, if I do watch TV news it would be local or BBC world news, Cant stand the closed minded partisian crap that fools like you fall for hook line and sinker

    The Repugs did not want to bail out the auto companies. Thats a fact. And once in a while even a Republican does something good.
    If Obama would have pulled the plug on Afghanistan he would have been crucified for all the deaths that had occured. Theones that would have been for nothing!
    It's dopes like you that says Obama only raises taxes and the article proves you wrong. But these were for people that needed them, not the top 1%.

    dave1954

  • pazbuc said...

    If they had gone under the cars would have been supplied by the other car makers in this country who would have hired more workers to meet the demand. The net employment would have been zero.

    What car makers. Do you think someone would have just put up a plant and produced cars? You are just lying to make Obama look bad. Hard to discuss with liars.

    dave1954

  • dave1954 said...

    The Repugs did not want to bail out the auto companies. Thats a fact. And once in a while even a Republican does something good. If Obama would have pulled the plug on Afghanistan he would have been crucified for all the deaths that had occured. Theones that would have been for nothing! It's dopes like you that says Obama only raises taxes and the article proves you wrong. But these were for people that needed them, not the top 1%.

    Very hard to beielve you are real when you show very little understanding of events.

    Can you point out where in this post or in any post for that matter where I have said Obama only raises taxes? Has he raised some taxes? sure he has but no more than any other Pres. I know your reading comprehension is very low, but this is the third time in this string where you are saying I say something I never did.

    If you look at my first post I agree with you and commend you for admitting that Obama is the same as Bush that he cuts taxes. Yeah Dave, I am the Dope

    gpracer73

  • This post is for members of Bucknuts or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial

    dave1954

  • dave1954 said...

    What car makers. Do you think someone would have just put up a plant and produced cars? You are just lying to make Obama look bad. Hard to discuss with liars.

    Seriously? you must not follow the auto industry much, to be honest I am not sure you follow anything much.

    the Auto business is ripe with buy outs and take overs, ford alone in the past 30 years have bought and sold a half dozen car companies from Jaguar to cosworth

    GM has bought and sold companies Like Lotus and Saab, Hummer ring a bell?. VW and BMW just recently bought a handfull of companies, VW took over Lambo, Porsche, Seat, Buggati, BMW took over Land rover and Mini.

    the perfect example Dave is Fiat, you know them dont you, they are the italian company that Obama brokered a deal with to buy Chrysler. and guess what, they are expanding into once shuttered factories.

    than you get into the venture capitalist out there, people like Proton who most recently purchased Lotus.

    Nobody would have put up a plant to build a Volt or Buick, the assets were allready in place, that is what would have made them very attractive. the only down side to that would be all union contracts would have been voided, makes you think on that one huh?

    I am not against what Bush and Obama did with GM and Chrysler, but you cant argue what they did saved them, because left to normal bankruptcy with no Govt intervention could have resulted in the same outcome today, one only has to look at past large corporation bankruptcies, delta air lines is a perfect example, they follwed normal bankruptcy and came back stronger than they were before.

    This post was edited by gpracer73 on 6/7/2012 at 1:00 PM

    gpracer73

  • gpracer73 said...

    Tim

    bush also used tax cuts to stimulate the economy during the recession when he entered office, this was even in the article you posted about Obama turning around the economy, are you trying to say the difference between Obama and Bush is Obama used it for economic stimulas and Bush didnt?

    I would hope you are one of the few smart ones here that dont buy into the conspiracy theory of bush only used them to steal a election?

    I never said bush tax cuts didnt add to the debt/deficit, his mistake was he didnt cut spending to matcht eh cuts, but some of the far left on here have been saying the Bush tax cuts ruined the economy and caused the recession at the end of his term, that is plain crazy, cant figure out how giving more moeny to consumers can cause a recession but I guess I am not a economist.

    Are you blaming the economy in europe on the fact that some countries have went the austerity route? seriously? Like I siad above I am not a economist but I am also not naive enough to pin a 4 year world wide recession on a few countries trying some austerity measures. there are plenty of examples where the austerity program is working very well, go llok at Sweedens numbers recently, that program is working very well. Germany as well to an extent etc.

    Once again, you did not refute or change my opinion that there is little to no difference between Obama and Bush, this article is just one of the items that they used the same tools and ideas and I find it funny that it was posted by one of the far left loonies on here and he doesnt even realize what he posted really says

    gpracer

    I believe you are in error about W using his tax cut as a stimulus for the recession. The recession started in March 2001 but was not official until early April. The tax cuts were signed into law on June 7, 2001 with most of the work done prior to the recession. He was instead giving people their money back based upon the projected surpluses from the Clinton administration. In fact the cuts were suppose to come mostly in 2006 but were moved up in the 2003 tax cut bill.

    The difference in the tax cuts Obama used were their targeting as I mentioned. W was giving tax cuts to give people some of their money back. They had a projected surplus of $10 trillion in 2010 (Hard to believe) and the repubs thought the people should have their money back instead of gov running a surplus. We now see how well that worked out.

    I'm not big on conspiracy theories but most politicians do look at most of their actions through multiple lenses including political: How will this affect my voters? How will this affect my contributors? Probably in reverse order. Given that he campaigned on cutting taxes, not sure how you could call it buying votes or stealing the election or re-election

    The tax cuts contributed to the deficits and the debt. While I don't think many economists see either of those as one of the primary causes of the recession, I believe that the psychology of the massive debt contributed to the psychological fear that exploded when the housing bubble, related derivatives, etc. hit the fan. This fear did not cause the fall of the DOW but may have indeed exacerbated the speed and depth of the drop.

    Not sure how you got the idea that I was saying austerity programs caused the recession. I stated that the spending cuts, including cuts in social safety nets, and other austerity measures in response to the recession have lead to serous problems in their recovery. While I was just going from general knowledge of what I have heard and read, I just googled it and here are some examples that support/explain what I was trying to say:

    "But inspectors from the European Union and International Monetary Fund said the soaring jobless rate required "decisive policy action", adding fuel to a region-wide debate on whether to extend or row back on the austerity programs that have put a brake on growth in Europe's most vulnerable economies, including Portugal."
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/sns-rt-us-portugal-economy-unemploymentbre8540kw-20120605,0,1111594.story

    "Economist Joseph Stiglitz criticized European austerity measures, saying "there has never been any successful austerity program in any large country," Bloomberg News reported.

    Stiglitz told reporters in Vienna Thursday that "austerity combined with the constraints of the euro are a lethal combination," Bloomberg reported.

    The Nobel Prize winner and Columbia University professor said "the austerity approach will lead to high levels of unemployment that will be politically unacceptable and will make deficits get worse," the report said. He said European leaders should "fully utilize" entities like the European Investment Bank and use balanced budget multipliers, Bloomberg reported."
    http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120427-713979.html

    The point is that during a recession spending by people and government contracts and the economy does not grow (not growing being the definition of a recession). Austerity programs usually include spending cuts and tax increases. The problem is that both actions tend to aggravate the recession, there is even less money being spent for goods and services which leads to further unemployment which leads to less revenue and more money needed for the safety net (unemployment, food stamps, etc.).

    Here are some links by the liberal Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman which take issue with austerity as an answer to a recession.

    This link is a 5 page article from Krugman's book "End This Depression Now!" It is entitled "Austerity is Oh so wrong!"
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/06/paul-krugman-austerity-is-so-wrong.html

    This link shows in the second graph that Germany's "austerity" was not real because the government consumption never really went down that much.
    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/28/euro-austerity-continued/

    Others
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/opinion/krugman-the-austerity-agenda.html
    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/28/euro-austerity-continued/

    I gave up trying to change anyone's mind after my first 3 days on here a few years ago. Like you and others I just give my take on things.

    You were wrong, IMO, when you wrote "about how tax cuts ruined the economy, and how they dont help at all, about how the idiot George Bush used them as stealing elections how they are the single sole reason for our debt and deficits.

    Now you are for tax cuts because some partisian far left web site used statistics to show Obama cuts taxes more than Bush and how he also cut taxes without cutting spendings the same amount just like Bush?"

    Again Obama and libs are not against the income tax cuts for the bottom 98%, only for the top 2%. I and most libs were also in favor of the tax cuts in Obama's stimulus and his cut on the payroll taxes. That seems to refute what I just quoted by you - but if you don't think so that is okay. Same with you claim that W and Obama used tax cuts for the same purpose, they did not as I discussed. You can look at W's campaign promises, when there was not a recession, to see it was about returning a "surplus" to the people to whom the money actually belonged.

    And yes I know that cons disagree with almost anything Krugman says. But his numbers and charts seem to be valid and factual as far as what I have checked out.

    Though often asked, God does not take sides in politics or college football.

    TimMcM ●

Ohio State
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports