Question about the Bush tax cuts

[HomerJS]

There is so much controversy over Obama raising taxes on people making over $250K thereby rolling back the Bush tax cuts set to expire in 2010.

If the Bush tax cuts were so good for the economy why were they set to expire? Why were the cuts setup so someone else would be responsible for maintaining them?

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: HomerJS
-snip-
If the Bush tax cuts were so good for the economy why were they set to expire? Why were the cuts setup so someone else would be responsible for maintaining them?

I'm not sure why they are setup to expire, but seems to be S.O.P. these days. Might be a *budget* or P.R. thing. While I think it's mostly BS for too many reasons to discuss here, when there is a tax cut they calculate the cost (or savings, depending on your perspective) over the life of the cuts. The shorter the life, the smaller the cost appears to be (and a smaller advertised adverse effect on the national deficit making politically more palatable I think).

Fern

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: HomerJS
Why were the cuts setup so someone else would be responsible for maintaining them?

Typical bi-partisan sleaze. Pile up debt now, get credit for the deficit-funded cuts, leave it for future congresses to deal with.

It's the same as corporate execs chasing this-quarter profits to get their performance bonuses. The long-term harm to the company doesn't matter.

Same as social securty and medicare. Fixing them now would be painful and require citizens pay more or get less, leading to the politicians not getting re-elected. Ignoring the problem for now is the safe choice if you care more about yourself than the people who eleteced you.

Or maybe I'm just too cynical?

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: HomerJS
There is so much controversy over Obama raising taxes on people making over $250K thereby rolling back the Bush tax cuts set to expire in 2010.

If the Bush tax cuts were so good for the economy why were they set to expire? Why were the cuts setup so someone else would be responsible for maintaining them?

One word...Deficit. The rationale for the tax cuts was that the economy needed a stimulus (remember the recession in early 2000?), which is a temporary measure.

That said, it was a theory of Reagan and the Republicans that once the tax cuts went through, we could keep them because the extra savings would "trickle down" from the wealthy and the corporations, and that would keep the economy in good shape.
Unfortunately, they were wrong...trickle down economics hasn't worked.

 

[AFMatt]

How many tax cuts don't have an expiration? These bills are passed to simply make us Americans feel good for a moment. By the time they expire, or are extended, we forgot all about the cuts and they were probably erased by some stealth raises anyway.
Obama's welfare check plan will expire too.

 

[ElFenix]

easier to get through congress.

 

[sactoking]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
easier to get through congress.

This

 

[HomerJS]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
easier to get through congress.

But Repubs had the WH, House and Senate.

 

[techs]

There was some sort of Senate deal because the Republicans were afraid that a permanent tax cut could not survive a filibuster so the deal was if they could get 55 senate votes for the tax cut til only to 2010 there would be no filibuster.

 

[Brainonska511]

It was a budgeting trick to keep the deficit in check. By setting them to expire in 2010, you can make the budget not look so bad. And you could also blame the 2010 Congress/President when they expire and claim that they are raising taxes.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: techs
There was some sort of Senate deal because the Republicans were afraid that a permanent tax cut could not survive a filibuster so the deal was if they could get 55 senate votes for the tax cut til only to 2010 there would be no filibuster.

Hey look, a rational fact filled post from techs. :beer: You need to post more posts like this.

 

[counterstrikedude]

Originally posted by: HomerJS
There is so much controversy over Obama raising taxes on people making over $250K thereby rolling back the Bush tax cuts set to expire in 2010.

If the Bush tax cuts were so good for the economy why were they set to expire? Why were the cuts setup so someone else would be responsible for maintaining them?

The tax cut has been reduced to people making over 140k, as far as I know.

Obama's plan won't be passed in Congress even with a democratic majority - no legislator is that stupid, except for Obama and his band of worshipers of course.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: HomerJS
If the Bush tax cuts were so good for the economy why were they set to expire? Why were the cuts setup so someone else would be responsible for maintaining them?

Good for the economy short term, not good for the deficit long term.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: techs
There was some sort of Senate deal because the Republicans were afraid that a permanent tax cut could not survive a filibuster so the deal was if they could get 55 senate votes for the tax cut til only to 2010 there would be no filibuster.

Hey look, a rational fact filled post from techs. :beer: You need to post more posts like this.

I noticed it too. Good post techs :thumbsup:

 

[Hulk]

It is interesting that just about every time taxes are cut Federal revenue INCREASES.

Why is that? Seems as though tax increases on the wealthy are more punishment than anything else since it doensn't increase Federal tax revenue.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Hulk
It is interesting that just about every time taxes are cut Federal revenue INCREASES.

Why is that? Seems as though tax increases on the wealthy are more punishment than anything else since it doensn't increase Federal tax revenue.

You won't get very far with your "voodoo supply side economics" around here.

People here largely can't grasp "increase Joe the Plumber's taxes and it will cost you more to snake your John".

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: Hulk
It is interesting that just about every time taxes are cut Federal revenue INCREASES.

Why is that? Seems as though tax increases on the wealthy are more punishment than anything else since it doensn't increase Federal tax revenue.

They don't increase right away.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Hulk
It is interesting that just about every time taxes are cut Federal revenue INCREASES.

Why is that? Seems as though tax increases on the wealthy are more punishment than anything else since it doensn't increase Federal tax revenue.

Yes, you raise taxes to high, you lose revenue. You go too low, you loose revenue as well.

Capital gains is prime example. SInce it went to 15% those revenues continued to surge. Those that want to raise cap gain want only to punish, not increase revenue.