Fred Thompson: Tax cuts mean growth

[sukie]

Case Closed
Tax cuts mean growth

BY FRED THOMPSON
Saturday, April 14, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

It's that time again, and I was thinking of the old joke about paying your taxes with a smile. The punch line is that the IRS doesn't accept smiles. They want your money.

So it's not that funny, but there is reason to smile this tax season. The results of the experiment that began when Congress passed a series of tax-rate cuts in 2001 and 2003 are in. Supporters of those cuts said they would stimulate the economy. Opponents predicted ever-increasing budget deficits and national bankruptcy unless tax rates were increased, especially on the wealthy.

In fact, Treasury statistics show that tax revenues have soared and the budget deficit has been shrinking faster than even the optimists projected. Since the first tax cuts were passed, when I was in the Senate, the budget deficit has been cut in half.

Remarkably, this has happened despite the financial trauma of 9/11 and the cost of the War on Terror. The deficit, compared to the entire economy, is well below the average for the last 35 years and, at this rate, the budget will be in surplus by 2010.

Perhaps the most fascinating thing about this success story is where the increased revenues are coming from. Critics claimed that across-the-board tax cuts were some sort of gift to the rich but, on the contrary, the wealthy are paying a greater percentage of the national bill than ever before.

The richest 1% of Americans now pays 35% of all income taxes. The top 10% pay more taxes than the bottom 60%.

The reason for this outcome is that, because of lower rates, money is being invested in our economy instead of being sheltered from the taxman. Greater investment has created overall economic strength. Job growth is robust, overcoming trouble in the housing sector; and the personal incomes of Americans at every income level are higher than they've ever been.

President John F. Kennedy was an astute proponent of tax cuts and the proposition that lower tax rates produce economic growth. Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan also understood the power of lower tax rates and managed to put through cuts that grew the U.S. economy like Kansas corn. Sadly, we just don't seem able to keep that lesson learned.


...more...
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009940

[Green Lantern]

Economy good, cut taxes. Economy bad, cut taxes. Go to war, cut taxes. Social Security in trouble, cut taxes.

Is there any place for thought in this mantra?

[sukie]

So lets see... you advocate raising taxes because the economy is good because taxes were cut because the economy was bad due to tax cuts?

[TheGoodShepherd]

Case Closed
Tax cuts mean growth

BY FRED THOMPSON
Saturday, April 14, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

It's that time again, and I was thinking of the old joke about paying your taxes with a smile. The punch line is that the IRS doesn't accept smiles. They want your money.

So it's not that funny, but there is reason to smile this tax season. The results of the experiment that began when Congress passed a series of tax-rate cuts in 2001 and 2003 are in. Supporters of those cuts said they would stimulate the economy. Opponents predicted ever-increasing budget deficits and national bankruptcy unless tax rates were increased, especially on the wealthy.

In fact, Treasury statistics show that tax revenues have soared and the budget deficit has been shrinking faster than even the optimists projected. Since the first tax cuts were passed, when I was in the Senate, the budget deficit has been cut in half.

Remarkably, this has happened despite the financial trauma of 9/11 and the cost of the War on Terror. The deficit, compared to the entire economy, is well below the average for the last 35 years and, at this rate, the budget will be in surplus by 2010.

Perhaps the most fascinating thing about this success story is where the increased revenues are coming from. Critics claimed that across-the-board tax cuts were some sort of gift to the rich but, on the contrary, the wealthy are paying a greater percentage of the national bill than ever before.

The richest 1% of Americans now pays 35% of all income taxes. The top 10% pay more taxes than the bottom 60%.

The reason for this outcome is that, because of lower rates, money is being invested in our economy instead of being sheltered from the taxman. Greater investment has created overall economic strength. Job growth is robust, overcoming trouble in the housing sector; and the personal incomes of Americans at every income level are higher than they've ever been.

President John F. Kennedy was an astute proponent of tax cuts and the proposition that lower tax rates produce economic growth. Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan also understood the power of lower tax rates and managed to put through cuts that grew the U.S. economy like Kansas corn. Sadly, we just don't seem able to keep that lesson learned.


...more...
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009940


Ummmmm why do they only look at income tax....why not look at the whole tax system....this is the stupidest most biased article ever.

It measures only what it wants to, and leaves out what it wants.

Someone post a serious article not this nonesense.

[TheGoodShepherd]

So lets see... you advocate raising taxes because the economy is good because taxes were cut because the economy was bad due to tax cuts?

Are you going to try and lie to me about your inheritence again sukie?

[sukie]

Never lied... unfortunately you missed that. But I ilke it when you feel you have something on me. Besides what does this have to do with the thread?

I am in the top 10% tax paying group.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Never lied... unfortunately you missed that. But I ilke it when you feel you have something on me. Besides what does this have to do with the thread?

I am in the top 10% tax paying group.

Riiight...you were just putting me on I assume...and you're right it has nothing to do with the topic, so unlike you in the other thread, ill stick to the actual topic as per the rest of my posts in this thread.

[sukie]

You've said nothing on the topic.

[TheGoodShepherd]

You've said nothing on the topic.


Well the rich don't pay most of the taxes in the U.S. and they certainly don't pay 60 per cent of all income tax.

[sukie]

So thompson's numbers are wrong? I believe them.

[35Pete]

You know. If lower taxes meant more revenues for the liberals to create utopia with then you'd think that they'd be gung-ho about it. Increased prosperity AND money for their beloved programs.

But that's not good enough. Why?

Stratification. They want to eliminate this. Doesn't matter if prosperity is affected. They feel that everyone must be equal in every manner. Which is ridiculous of course.

[TheGoodShepherd]

So thompson's numbers are wrong? I believe them.

Definitely wrong.

How much taxes do the rich pay in sales taxes, SS taxes, gas taxes?

Is it even mentioned?

[TheGoodShepherd]

You know. If lower taxes meant more revenues for the liberals to create utopia with then you'd think that they'd be gung-ho about it. Increased prosperity AND money for their beloved programs.

But that's not good enough. Why?

Stratification. They want to eliminate this. Doesn't matter if prosperity is affected. They feel that everyone must be equal in every manner. Which is ridiculous of course.

What does this rant about your perceived version of liberal motivations have to do with the topic?

[sukie]

Rich pay more SS tax...and Sales taxes since they purchase more.

[35Pete]

What does this rant about your perceived version of liberal motivations have to do with the topic?

It partially explains why your thought processes are so incredibly ****ed up. That's one thing.

[TheGoodShepherd]

It partially explains why your thought processes are so incredibly ****ed up. That's one thing.

What do I personally have to do with the topic at hand?

[TheGoodShepherd]

Rich pay more SS tax...and Sales taxes since they purchase more.

Is that what you think...got a link to substantiate that claim?

[sukie]

I paid the maximum collectable as far a SS taxes

[TheGoodShepherd]

I paid the maximum collectable as far a SS taxes

Again, do you have a link to substantiate the claim the rich pay more SS and sales taxes than the rest of the population or not?

Oh, and just to be technical what income bracket do you mean when you say rich?

[sukie]

An enormous percentage of taxes are payed by a minority of Americans:
The Top 1% of taxpayers pay 29% of all taxes.
The Top 5% of taxpayers pay 50% of all taxes.
Our tax system is not so much progressive as it is confiscatory -- Frederic Bastiat called this phenomenon "legal plunder." A progressive tax is based on the premise that those with more income can afford to pay more taxes, and conversely, those with little or no income should pay no tax. However, a quick look at Graph 1A below shows that the U.S. tax system has become far beyond progressive. Fully half the taxpayers contribute almost nothing in individual income taxes.
The Top 1% of income earners (comprising about 1 million families) earn about 15% of the total income earned by all wage earners in the United States, yet they pay almost 30% of all individual income taxes.
Furthermore, the Top 1% are shouldering a roughly 50% higher proportion of the overall income tax burden than they did in 1977.
The argument most oft used against tax breaks are that they benefit only the wealthy. It is clear from even a cursory look at the numbers below that the 'wealthy' will receive the majority of any income tax reduction because they pay a disproportionately huge percentage of the income taxes! To structure a tax break such that those in upper income brackets are excluded would constitute nothing more than transfer of wealth from those who have it to those who don't (i.e. legal plunder.)

http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/

[Green Lantern]

So lets see... you advocate raising taxes because the economy is good because taxes were cut because the economy was bad due to tax cuts?

I never advocated anything. I am only commenting that most conservatives believe that there should be no thinking involved in fiscal politics. Whatever the question, the answer is cut taxes. It is easy and it sells to the voters; and an almost certainty that it is the incorrect answer. Real life is not one-size fits all. Haven't you learned yet from the dink in the White House?

[sukie]

So if taxes were raised you wouldn't have posted the above, aqua?

[TheGoodShepherd]

An enormous percentage of taxes are payed by a minority of Americans:
The Top 1% of taxpayers pay 29% of all taxes.
The Top 5% of taxpayers pay 50% of all taxes.
Our tax system is not so much progressive as it is confiscatory -- Frederic Bastiat called this phenomenon "legal plunder." A progressive tax is based on the premise that those with more income can afford to pay more taxes, and conversely, those with little or no income should pay no tax. However, a quick look at Graph 1A below shows that the U.S. tax system has become far beyond progressive. Fully half the taxpayers contribute almost nothing in individual income taxes.
The Top 1% of income earners (comprising about 1 million families) earn about 15% of the total income earned by all wage earners in the United States, yet they pay almost 30% of all individual income taxes.
Furthermore, the Top 1% are shouldering a roughly 50% higher proportion of the overall income tax burden than they did in 1977.
The argument most oft used against tax breaks are that they benefit only the wealthy. It is clear from even a cursory look at the numbers below that the 'wealthy' will receive the majority of any income tax reduction because they pay a disproportionately huge percentage of the income taxes! To structure a tax break such that those in upper income brackets are excluded would constitute nothing more than transfer of wealth from those who have it to those who don't (i.e. legal plunder.)

http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/


Again, do you have a link to substantiate the claim the rich pay more SS and sales taxes than the rest of the population or not? Because your above post does not address the claim you made about SS and sales taxes.

Oh, and just to be technical what income bracket do you mean when you say rich?

[Green Lantern]

You know. If lower taxes meant more revenues for the liberals to create utopia with then you'd think that they'd be gung-ho about it. Increased prosperity AND money for their beloved programs.

But that's not good enough. Why?

Stratification. They want to eliminate this. Doesn't matter if prosperity is affected. They feel that everyone must be equal in every manner. Which is ridiculous of course.

According to you Liberals believe in equality of outcome and Conservatives believe in equality of opportunity?

[sukie]

SS is tied to income

[TheGoodShepherd]

SS is tied to income

I didn't think you could produce a link that claims the rich pay more SS and sales taxes than everyone else.

[TheGoodShepherd]

Check out the report released by the IRS in 2003. It was the first time the agency had a public analyisis of the tax return filed by the 400 richest Americans. The years they were filed were between 1992 and 2000.

Just the minimumm to make the top increased from 24.4 million to 86.6 million. 21 taxpayers made the list. 2,200 hundred names appeared on the 3,600 tax returns analyzed. In 2000, the top 400 recieved 1.1 per cent of all the income in America. That was double their 0.5 per cent share in 1992.

It was also found on average, their income was 174 million, four times the 46.8 million average in 1992. And their share of federal income taxes fell. They only paid 22.2 cents on the dollar in income taxes in 2000. That was actually DOWN from 26 per cent in 1992. And the tax rate had increased by 13 cents overall in 1992.

While Americans were enduring a federal income tax rise of 18 per cent, the burden fell by 16 per cent for the top 400.

[sukie]

You are talking about 400 people... I'm talking about millions. I paid personal income taxes equal to over two times the poverty level

[TheGoodShepherd]

You are talking about 400 people... I'm talking about millions. I paid personal income taxes equal to over two times the poverty level

LOL...because you're financing tax breaks for the super rich and their companies you clown!

[Green Lantern]

So if taxes were raised you wouldn't have posted the above, aqua?

No. If the Dems. were in power and they said: Economy good, raise taxes so we can help people. Economy bad, raise taxes so we can help people. War time, raise taxes to we can fight. No war, raise taxes so we can dismantle.

Then I would post the above to some asinine logic.

I keep going through this over and over: I do not agree with many people on many things.

I have an advanced degree in PS, right? Asking me which side I am on in a political debates is like asking a zoologist if they prefer when vultures or hyeina pick over the carcass of a zebra after the lions are done with it.

Personally, I think conservatism has been on the rise since Reagan, it counter-balanced the 60's.

Personally, I think our country could go the other direction for awhile.

Personally, I think just because the country gave congress to the Dems. does not mean that conservatism is still not moving along. Reaganism has moved the country so far Right that what used to be Right (Sandra O'Connor) is now middle.

Personally, I think that it is a sign that we have not finished with our conservative swing since most people don't see it yet.

I stick it more often to conservatives for this reason. When the country is liberal for twenty straight years and their rationale become irrational, I will be asking them pointed questions to illogical answers for important questions.

[sukie]

Nice post.

[Mouldsie]

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ty5R3-waCA4"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ty5R3-waCA4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gm98PceJhSg"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gm98PceJhSg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>


Wish I could find the comedy central full version of the economy skit