Extending Bush Tax Cuts WON'T Create Jobs, Says Leading Economist

[laughingliberal]

As Congress debates whether to extend Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans at least one prominent U.S. economist has already cast his negative vote.

"Not all budgetary dollars are created equal," said Alan Blinder, professor and co-director of Princeton University's Center for Economic Policy Studies, in a conference Wednesday morning. "Some have a lot of bang for the buck, and some have very little. The GDP increase per dollar of budgetary cost is in the range of 1.6, 1.7 for things like food stamps and unemployment benefits, and in the range of .35 for extending the Bush tax cuts. We could get some substantial job creation by simply reprogramming the $75 billion that would be saved over the next two years by not extending the upper-bracket Bush tax cuts and spending it instead on unemployment benefits, food stamps, and the like."

Blinder's economic advice supports the tax policy of President Obama and the Democrats, who would like to maintain tax cuts for 95 percent of Americans, while letting the cuts for those with incomes above $250,000 expire. Letting the tax cuts lapse is projected to trim approximately $675 billion from the deficit over 10 years, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

The GOP, by contrast, is aiming to extend the Bush tax cuts across the board, and has tried to block the billions in deficit spending to extend benefits to the long-term unemployed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/28/bush-tax-cuts-extending_n_662743.html?ir=Politics

Time for the wealthy to pay their share. :)

[Bryn]

1. I feel sure it will pass! It should! K&R

:kick:

Rep. John Boozman (R) of Arkansas is crying foul! He wants to extend it. But won't extend unemployment benefits. That's how bad he is. (he's running for US Senate and polls have shown him way ahead of Blanche Lincoln.)

[laughingliberal]

4. Just like Cornyn. OK to extend tax cuts without paying for them. Nothing for the unemployed, though

*sigh*

[jgraz]

2. K&R

[TheKentuckian]

3. Amazing how hard it is for some folks to see what should be obvious as the sky being blue

I mean really the only counter argument is faith based nonsense in our bogus secular religion brought down from the great and almighty Invisible Hand by St Ronnie himself.

Say it with me, there is no trickle down.

[Desertrose]

5. K&R

[Lorien]

6. Absolutely! nt

[Spheric]

7. K&R /nt

[Enthusiast]

8. K&R!

If the tax cuts were going to spur job growth they would have already done it. They won't, they don't. Let the tax cuts expire.

[dkf]

9. That isn't the question as keeping the tax cuts is status quo.

The question is if we will lose jobs once the tax cuts lapse.

[laughingliberal]

19. I don't see it. We didn't lose jobs when Clinton raised taxes at the top. nt

[Turbineguy]

10. Since economies work as systems....

Giving small amounts of money to large numbers of people (who spend it inside the system boundary) would be better than giving large amounts to a few who bank it offshore (outside the system boundary).

This has been the fatal flaw in Reaganomics making it essentially trickle up. Wealth has been leaving America but hidden and replaced by debt.

[HughBeaumont]

11. Well, durrrrrrrr.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/HughBeaumont/94

They never do. Hey, let's just ring up the credit card, have nothing to show for our money wasting . . . and blame it on Democrats. Classic.

[cordelia]

12. K&R

[John Agar]

13. K & R. Any sensible person should be able to understand this.

The time is well overdue.

Thanks for posting this.

[Laelth]

14. k&r for the truth. Thanks for posting. n/t

-Laelth

[Orsino]

15. Aw, c'mon...give 'em time.

One of these decades, tax cuts for the rich are sure to create jobs.

[Liberal In Texas]

16. Well, DUH! The rich guys haven't done it so far, so why would they

if the tax cuts continue? Everything I see says they're sitting on their piles of money, not "creating jobs."

Start taxing their profits and see how fast they turn money back into their companies to get the deductions. Oh, and tax them for outsourcing manufacturing while we're at it. Maybe we could get some of the jobs back into this country. (I know, dream on.)

[laughingliberal]

20. That's it, exactly! Taxing profits forces investment.

In order to avoid higher taxes, they have to invest in something. Be it materials, equipment, building expansion or repair, company vehicles-it all puts the money back in the real economy. If they don't invest, then the government has the money for stimulus-helping the poor, repairing our infrastructure, etc...

[raccoon]

17. Who don't know that? Even the Republicans who are in favor of it probably know that.

They wouldn't admit it, though.

[unapatriciated]

18. K&R

[femrap]

21. Damn

If tax reductions for the f*cking rich worked, we'd already be swimming in more jobs than we needed.

Logic, repugnants, use logic.

They're despicable. More money for the rich! Yes, that's the ticket.