Zynx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-11-08 01:31 PM
Original message |
Supply Side Economics Thoroughly Debunked |
|
Edited on Fri Jan-11-08 01:32 PM by Zynx
Receipts outside the Social Security System
Clinton Years Receipts 1993: $842 billion Receipts 2001: $1.483 Trillion Growth: 76%
Bush Jr. Years Receipts 2001: $1.483 trillion Expected 2009: $ 2.086 trillion Growth: 40.6%
Reagan Years: Receipts 1981: $469 billion Receipts 1989: $727 billion Growth: 55%
Source: U.S. Government Printing Office
-----------------------------------------------
Now as we all know, the Republicans claim that tax cuts lead to such economic growth that you will have more revenue than you would have had without them. Without getting into the discussion of the GDP growth itself, let's cut the crap and go right to the government revenue which they are claiming is the end result. As we can see, the Clinton years had far faster revenue growth than either the Reagan years or Bush II. This is even though he had a lower inflation rate, a fact that normally constrains government revenue growth.
I am starting more detailed work on this subject as it relates to my Economics degree, but this is a very quick summary.
If I used revenues including the Social Security system, the results are pretty much the same, but I prefer to focus on the General Fund as that is where fiscal policy takes place.
|
Zynx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-11-08 01:35 PM
Response to Original message |
1. *Kick*...Larry Kudlow right in the nuts |
Jeff In Milwaukee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-11-08 01:42 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Dig a little deeper... |
|
You'll find that most of the "Reagan Years" increase in revenues came from tax increases passed in 1986. Even some Republicans (like a then-nearly-sane Bob Dole) supported the tax increases because the deficits were out of control. If Congress had passed Reagan's budgets as proposed, revenues would have been lower and the deficits would have been even bigger.
|
Zynx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Jan-11-08 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. Yeah I am going to dig through these numbers even deeper. |
|
On the most superficial level it is bad enough for them.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 12th 2024, 03:57 AM
Response to Original message |