Analysts: Bush tax cuts are swelling deficit(Tax revenues grew 15 % over the previous year ?)

KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS ^ | Thu, May. 18, 2006 | KEVIN G. HALL

[IrishMike]

WASHINGTON -- When President Bush signed legislation Wednesday to extend lower tax rates for capital gains and dividend income through 2010, he suggested that his tax cuts are behind a surge of new revenue into the Treasury, and he implied that it's enough to offset the revenue lost by these reductions.

At a ceremony on the White House lawn, Bush said his tax cuts had helped the economy grow, "which means more tax revenue for the federal Treasury."

That's just not true. A host of studies, some written by economists who served in the Bush administration, concluded that tax cuts mean less money for the Treasury.

The cuts Bush extended Wednesday will cost the Treasury $70 billion over five years. They may help spur economic growth, but they still lose more revenue than they generate. And unless they're matched by lower federal spending, they worsen federal budget deficits.

Tax revenues grew by $274 billion in 2005, a 15 percent increase over the previous year; and receipts are growing this year too.

That doesn't mean that economists oppose reducing taxes on capital gains and dividends. They just want them to be balanced so they don't worsen budget deficits.

[IrishMike]

......A host of studies, some written by economists who served in the Bush administration .......

Some who served in Bush Administration ???????? That would most who didn't..... NICE BALANCE

[lonestar67]

Wow!

These are fascinating theories.

But in reality, a record surplus of cash came in in April 2006-- far exceeding expert opinions. In fact, the CBO now estimates that the deficit is turning down much more rapidly than anticipated.

So we don't need to theorize negatively as Knight Ridder so generously offers to do.

[RasterMaster]

Kind of hard to perpetuate that lie with record tax revenues and continued booming growth. Who's money is it again that funds these programs? These spenders need to remember who's paying the bill before they whine about low taxes.

[M1Tanker]

You are not supposed to read into "journalism" that deeply... A "reeducation" team is in route now.

Seriously, the Laffer Curve (spelled wrong perhaps) proves itself again and again. Lowering taxes to a certain point stimulates the economy and increases the tax-base, thus increasing revenue. What we must do is cut non-discretionary spending that congress has signed into law. This is where a majority of the Federal Budget goes. Then we should apply industry standards like "Lean" and "Six Sigma" to every area of the government we possibly can.

What we will find is knowledge common to Freepers for years: The government can do A LOT more with less money and people.

But these ivy league "scholars" could care less about the truth and reality.

[The Great RJ]

....unless they're matched by lower federal spending, they worsen federal budget deficits.

Let's see if I get a 15% raise, but continue to spend money over my income, I'm in financial trouble. This is hardly PhD level economics. With our current Congress, even if we increased taxes by dropping all of these cuts they would still be spending more money than they collect. The problem isn't the tax cuts it's Congress wasting the people's money.

[Youngman442002]

I don't get it ...the article says the tax cut "costs" 70 billion in 5 years....but revenues INCREASED 276 billion in 2005.......but the tax cuts "cost"....huh....boy these economists need to go back to school....ooops..they are in school..they are professors teaching our childen..must be the NEW math

[IrishMike]

Basic mathamatics 101 .............
YES there is a loss of taxes to the federal government, because it's our (taxpayers) money, and we keep / spend more of OUR money, rather than listening to the DC beltway whiners cry over the money they cannot spent.
None of it theirs to spend yet even DC politicians live in an entitlement 'world'..............
they believe it's their entitlement to spend our money.

[Flightdeck]

Here in the scientific world, if our theories don't properly explain reality, we change our theories. Maybe in econ it doesn't work that way....

[justshutupandtakeit]

This article makes as much sense as saying "justshutupandtakeit died today. He will take his son to the Sox game tomorrow."

[Publius6961]

That's just not true. A host of studies, some written by economists who served in the Bush administration, concluded that tax cuts mean less money for the Treasury.

Ahhhh. That respected "host of studies", anonymous and springing up like mushrooms all over...

Another article capitalizing on the ignorance of the American public.
The president proposes, but only Congress disposes.

What does Congress do with a 15% increase in revenues? Why, spend it on new pork or "progressive" programs, of course!

[IrishMike]

It's like the 'treasury' is in the profit business, with the DC crowd the 'shareholders', bitching about the consumer (taxpayers) buying less of their product........
......... ungreatful taxpayers, too stupid to understand what is really good for us.

[Ingtar]

The cuts Bush extended Wednesday will cost the Treasury $70 billion over five years. -14B per year.

Tax revenues grew by $274 billion in 2005... +$274B this year.

The math seems rather straight-forward to me from his article. I'm sure the entire $274 billion is not from tax cuts, but it still appears compelling to me.

[SoFloFreeper]

Look, you just don't understand. The experts are right, and let's face it: you're wrong. Just be quiet and listen to the economists who are 100% right 40% of the time. ;-)

[LibLieSlayer]

Nothing but anti-American communist tripe put out to counter the reality that TAX CUTS ALWAYS WORK TO GROW THE ECONOMY, AND INCREASE FEDERAL REVENUES!

LLS

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector?
The taxidermist takes only your skin.

MARK TWAIN

[LibLieSlayer]

"Ahhhh. That respected "host of studies", anonymous and springing up like mushrooms all over..."

Yep, they grow them in the dark, and feed them ****. :-)

LLS

[soccer_maniac]

Tax cuts should be matched by spending cuts

[IrishMike]

I'm for both, but spending cuts should be deep and the only way to accomplish that...... vote conservative.

[FiddlePig]

None of the tax cut debate (on the left) is about truth!

[Chances Are]

Look, you just don't understand. The experts are right, and let's face it: you're wrong. Just be quiet and listen to the economists who are 100% right 40% of the time. ;-)

40%!!!!! Where on earth did you get that ridiculously high figure?!?

CA....