Bush tax cuts

Y U NO LIKE SUCCESSFUL PEOPLE, OBLAMER WOULD JUST WASTE THAT MONEY ANYWAY, WHAT ARE YOU A SOCIALIST, etc.

 

Yeah, and they want us to pay for the deficits they greatly increased. But it was supposed to unleash a flood of new taxes which didn't happen. As Rick Perry one of the GOP's bright new leaders said who has been supported whole heartedly by TJ and Bigtexx etc: "Oops"

 

It would only get worse...

 

The Bush tax cuts benefited nearly everyone tax wise. Crazy to think differently.

Those that benefited most were guys with significant income from qualified dividends that depending on their income saw the tax rate on those dividends go from 39.6% to 15%.

 

That's why it was passed. Market deregulation was rollin strong from 1996 to 2001. Then, once the market is deregulated, Bush merely put tax cuts on the table that really only benefited people profiting from a deregulated financial system. Then we get an implosion and the people who lobbied and profited walk away with billions. Nice work Washington you mother****ers.

 

It makes sense on the level that if I started a C-Corp, it would be taxed at 35% on income it made (I'd be a personal service corp, so the 35% is a flat rate), why should I be taxed at 35% personally for taking money out(assuming I'm in the top bracket).

Of course the S-corp was created 25 years ago, to fix that double taxation problem (Tax is only on the individual, not on the corporation).

Lower dividend rates encourage corporations to distribute dividends, while higher rates would encourage them to re-invest the money.

 

If the Bush tax cuts only benefited the rich, why does Obama insist on keeping the tax cuts for income below $250k? After all, that didn't benefit anyone, right?

 

The bush tax cuts lopsidedly benefited the 1%--you know, the crowd that makes money from their money.

 

When I say lopsided, I refer:

 

That is pretty big growth during the Clinton administration for the top 1% (tech bubble?). They crash after tech bubble burst & 9/11. Then recovers, and starts on similar track as during the Clinton administration, this time fueled by financial and housing bubbles.

The graph shows a problem, but I wouldn't consider the Bush tax cuts the primary issue, especially given that the problem existed prior.

 

When does the Bush tax cuts become the O's tax cuts? It could have ended anytime w a dem Congress and Senate.

 

The .1% have been deregulating financial markets since 1993. GHWB helped pass on his way out the door in '93 a bill that specifically impacted energy speculation. This is the time frame when the Koch Brothers built their empire and Enron was blowing full steam ahead. You can thank Bush & the Gramm family [both Texas families ironically] for pushing the first domino in a chain of dominos that have helped lead us to this point. Good read:

http://thinkprogress.org/report/koch-oil-speculation/

relevent part:

 

Not crazy to think the Bush tax cuts "benefited nearly everyone"


You are allegedly a CPA. Now would you consider a tax cut of say $100 for a client a good deal if it then cost them $4,000 in additional non-tax costs? Would you advise a client to make a totally unnecessary business expense just so they could reduce their taxes say by 25% on that expenditure.

E.g the tuition in state supported colleges has gone up greatly due to tax cuts and less government subsidies. Only those with substantial dividends, a fairly small percentage, have received more in tax cuts than the increased tuition.

 

Can you read:

"benefited nearly everyone tax wise"

 

I can't speak for other states, but I know Texas's revenue streams do not increase at a high enough rate to match the increasing rate of spending. Raising taxes to match current spending would be a temporary fix as the structural deficit still exists and spending would soon exceed the new level of taxes. Currently, Texas is just cutting spending every 2 years.

As Medicaid becomes a larger percentage of the state budget, other things have to be cut or taxes have to be raised. So far, Texas has survived by cutting services. Education and medicaid are the two biggest costs to the State if I remember correctly. Both of them can't survive as they are today unless taxes are increased every 2-4 years, a major rehaul of how Texas taxes, or a major rehaul of how Texas spends to tie expenditures to revenue sources.

Bush tax cuts have little impact on the structural deficit in Texas. Also, I don't know if the Bush Tax Cuts have really affected federal spending as it seems that Bush and now Obama still spend the same if not more with less revenue by going further in debt.

As long as spending increases at a faster rate than revenue from taxes, Texas will have trouble. I see things like rising tuition costs are more an issue at State level than federal level. I suspect similar issues are facing federal government.