This is question has these cut work in creating new job or is it just putting more money in big business pocket.
The top 2%'ers are the ones who made off like bandits-you know, all the wealthy corporate ceo types and elites that make bribes err campaign donations. It was sold as a good idea that did nothing but help transfer middle class wealth to the elites. Clinton got the ball rolling that Bush helped push even further. Had taxes for the very elite remained unchanged I envision the tax cuts would have created a more robust middle class if at the same time banks weren't loaning out 0% interest on homes and cars to create the huge credit and housing bubble.
the Bush tax cut has been in effect for 8 years. 8 years ago, unemployment rate was ~ 5.5%; it is now 9+%.
Um, you can thank "globalization" for that. Shipping manufacturing jobs to other countries and squeezing the middle class. Has little to do with "tax breaks".
The unemployment at 5.5% we enjoyed for the last decade used to be a statistical anomaly. I think it's more realistic to assume 8-12% in the near future for any recovery scenario.
I always find it humorous when people primarily associate Clinton tax rates with growth, and Bush tax rates with unemployment.
the bush years had a net gain of roughly 600,000 jobs in 8 years the Clinton years (with 3% higher tax rate) had a net gain of 22 million jobs.
when i wear my new white tshirt, the Texans beat the Colts. in the past, the Texans had a difficult time beating the Colts. i'm sure my new white t-shirt is responsible
I'm not defending Bush's economic policy. Too much free money flooded the market in the 00's. We should have been trying to slow down instead of keeping up the momentum of the 90's. That being said, Clinton enjoyed the tech boom during his presidency. I feel bad for Obama on that front, I think this economy is going to be his undoing unfortunately and I'm truly scared what voodoo economics will come in to play if repubs take back the white house in 2012
I don't think it's fair to correlate jobs to tax policy given the myriad of other factors involved. The primary thing I associate with the bush tax cuts is a staggeringly idiotic fiscal policy that exasperated our deficits to previously unheard of levels - with little or no benefit/rationale.
Are they to blame for unemployment etc? No. Are they to blame for the tremendous rise in income inequality? Absolutely - which leads to a lot of harmful economic and social effects. Tim Noah has been doing a great series on this over on Slate this month: http://www.slate.com/id/2266025/entry/2266026/ That's the real elephant in the room.
Of course corporations are "greedy".. its a business. I don't know why people find it so surprising that corporations are primarily focused on their bottom line. Corporations will become more generous and socially responsible when it makes business sense to do just that.
