Inspired from one of those things I starred in Google Reader:
There’s no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue. They increased revenue because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy.
– Senate Minority Leader Mitch McDonnell (R-KY)
It’s legitimate to praise the Bush tax cuts if your goal as a conservative is to enhance the wealth of the wealthy. If you are wealthy or you aspire to be wealthy and like to think that your hypothetical wealth would grow unbounded, the tax cuts look pretty vibrant. If you’re not in the top 10% of earners, not so vibrant:
As for that deficit that Tea Partiers are so upset about, that they’re so certain mostly composed of Obama’s socialist agenda:
Here’s another fancy chart (click to see it in all of its full fanciness):
Technically, McConnell is correct, in that IRS receipts went up over the past decade. This chart is from a right-wing website, which, like McConnell, touts how revenue increases followed the tax cuts.
I am obviously no economist, but tax revenues would’ve gone up anyway. All raw economic numbers are always going up. So this is a pretty silly argument, right? I’m inviting a conservative to chime in and tell me why it’s not a silly argument. And if it’s not a silly argument, the CBO numbers on the impact of the tax cuts on the deficit are still pretty damning. Conclusions on the numbers on their effect on income-inequality are subjected to one’s political philosophy, I suppose.
Geez, this amateurish in-depth analysis took up a lot of my time tonight. No wonder I usually stick to Sarah Palin sound-bytes.