Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bill Clinton: Republicans Canít Explain How Tax Cuts Help
CNBC ^ | Wednesday, 20 Mar 2013 | Kiran Moodley

Posted on 03/28/2013 4:53:20 PM PDT by presidio9

Edited on 03/28/2013 5:05:17 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

As Republicans stubbornly refuse to raise taxes and the sequester grips Washington, former President Bill Clinton said Republicans need to openly state how their proposals, specifically tax cuts, would realistically work for the benefit of the American economy.

In an interview for CNBC Meets, the 42nd president said the crucial issue in politics is always how. "Whatever you decide to do and however much money you have or don't, how do you propose to do it?" the president told CNBC's Tania Bryer. "Suppose you're a Republican. You think the only important thing to do is to cut taxes. Well, not all tax cuts are equal and there's a lot of evidence about what works and what doesn't."


(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: billclinton; clinton; taxes; x42

1 posted on 03/28/2013 4:53:20 PM PDT by presidio9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I’ll meet him halfway.

Tax “cuts” don’t help nearly as much as tax elimination and spending cuts do.


2 posted on 03/28/2013 4:56:37 PM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

The blow job President.


3 posted on 03/28/2013 4:57:00 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I wish he was no longer on the planet. Power and control freaks I detest them all!


4 posted on 03/28/2013 4:57:46 PM PDT by funfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Cut the spending, cut the taxes, cut the government. Abide by the constitution. Bill Clinton is an impeached failure.


5 posted on 03/28/2013 4:59:23 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Why is a rapist impeached EX-POTUS even asked what he thinks?


6 posted on 03/28/2013 4:59:49 PM PDT by Osage Orange (Life is a bitch. If it was easy, we would call it a slut)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I could tell OLD OLD Bill that if I pay less to the government in taxes that means I get to keep more of my money and I can spend it how I see fit. Maybe I can buy something from a local shop vendor which gives them more money that they can spend. When the government takes it from me and gives it to someone else I have less money
to spend or pay my bills with.


7 posted on 03/28/2013 5:01:20 PM PDT by funfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

He says things like this just to rattle people’s cage.

He KNOWS tax cuts work, but he’s a commie pig aristocrat and personal wealth and prosperity are NOT what he wants for the public at large.

BUT, when it comes to HIS bankroll, betcha he doesn’t pay one dime in tax, after all, that’s for the Buckwheat “masses” to pay.


8 posted on 03/28/2013 5:03:16 PM PDT by ConradofMontferrat (According to mudslymz, my handle is a HATE CRIME. And I HOPE they don't like it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FReepers
In this time of seeming ceaseless societal devolution in the USSA, it's a comfort to know there's still a handful of things we can count on . . . Slick is still a lying sack of shit.
9 posted on 03/28/2013 5:05:46 PM PDT by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Clinton’s right, some tax cuts will grow the economy. Bush’s tax cuts were largely garbage and Obama made them worse.

Will the GOP rise to the occassion and teach the public and the Dems why cutting taxes including the regulatory burden that creates invisible taxes works? Will the GOP embrace the free market again?


10 posted on 03/28/2013 5:06:40 PM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
"We produced a prosperity that was broadly shared, something that hadn't happened before or since. A hundred times as many people moved out of poverty in my eight years as president as in the previous twelve years,

It was the tech boom from events like the advent of Ecommerce, Y2K, and those mainframe migration projects, not his policies, that created many of those jobs.

including president Reagan's eight years."

Reagan inherited the Cold War and an economy that was in decline. Twelve years later, Clinton inherited an economy that was growing for almost two years, the end of the Cold War, and the start of the tech boom.

And it was the end of the Cold War, a Reagan accomplishment, and the opening of world markets that led to global Ecommerce, which was a big part of the tech boom.

11 posted on 03/28/2013 5:07:53 PM PDT by TwelveOfTwenty (Ho, ho, hey, hey, I'm BUYcotting Chick-Fil-A)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Duuuhhh! BJ Clinton could not explain stains on a blue dress, Hillary’s Rose Law firm billing records, White Water Land Investments (money laundering) or numerous other things.

More recently explain his constant presence in Harlem or where Der Hilderbeast lives. Not mention whether they are still man and wife (or whatever kind of critter she is).

Shut Up BJC. Go Away. You have done enough damage to the nations moral fiber.


12 posted on 03/28/2013 5:09:44 PM PDT by Texas Fossil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
Will the GOP rise to the occassion and teach the public and the Dems why cutting taxes including the regulatory burden that creates invisible taxes works? Will the GOP embrace the free market again?

At the moment I would settle permanently ending all discussion on whether corporations "pay" taxes. The do not. To suppose otherwise is to demonstrate that you know nothing about finance.

13 posted on 03/28/2013 5:14:08 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam is as Islam does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Why is ANYONE still listening to a disgraced, impeached, lying rapist?


14 posted on 03/28/2013 5:14:39 PM PDT by 21st Century Crusader (August 26, 1191)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

The lying, disgraced impeached arse could watch Milton Frioedman on youtube and get a good lesson in economics.


15 posted on 03/28/2013 5:17:10 PM PDT by Joe Bfstplk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

“You think the only important thing to do is cut taxes”

Stop right there. No one thinks that. This hack politician is dealing with straw men.

It may be true Pubs can’t ever seem to accomplish much more than cutting taxes, aside from starting somewhat bigger wars than Dems start these days. Some have even twisted it into an actual belief, as if cutting taxes alone meant something. Those of us who care about something more than buying votes and maintaining the status quo Welfare/Warfare state don’t care about tax cuts as such. They’re only useful so far as they shrink gubmint’s share of our wealth.


16 posted on 03/28/2013 5:22:27 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I’m content to say they don’t. Mostly because they don’t exist. The cost of taxes fall on real people. What I hate is the popular fallacy that they “pass it on” to consumers. That doesn’t happen, unless you have a gun pointed at consumer’s heads. What happens, really, is cost is carried back to the origin of production. Which means two things: anyone with a stake in the business is denied profit and the Forgotten Man doesn’t get paid.


17 posted on 03/28/2013 5:28:43 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Completely agree, but show me one government school graduate who after 13 years in the system understands dollars and sense (pun intended).

We let communists and socialists teach our kids about the free market and that’s insane. I was talking to some kids and they keep telling me that the government had to intervene as the market was failing. They didn’t see the government as the cause, but the solution.

Reagan would be puking. On second thought, he’d be out their convincing. Have you ever heard his radio addresses while he was in the “wilderness”?


18 posted on 03/28/2013 5:29:08 PM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
According to Bill's greatest hero, JFK...

"In short, it is a paradoxical truth that ... the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now. The experience of a number of European countries and Japan have borne this out. This country's own experience with tax reduction in 1954 has borne this out. And the reason is that only full employment can balance the budget, and tax reduction can pave the way to that employment. The purpose of cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus." – John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962, news conference

"Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government." – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 17, 1963, annual budget message to the Congress, fiscal year 1964

"In today's economy, fiscal prudence and responsibility call for tax reduction even if it temporarily enlarges the federal deficit – why reducing taxes is the best way open to us to increase revenues." – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 21, 1963, annual message to the Congress: "The Economic Report Of The President"

"It is no contradiction – the most important single thing we can do to stimulate investment in today's economy is to raise consumption by major reduction of individual income tax rates." – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 21, 1963, annual message to the Congress: "The Economic Report Of The President"

"Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate." – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.

"A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues." – John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill

19 posted on 03/28/2013 5:30:15 PM PDT by AmusedBystander (The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
What I hate is the popular fallacy that they “pass it on” to consumers. That doesn’t happen, unless you have a gun pointed at consumer’s heads.

That may be true if the consumer has the alternative of buying his product elsewhere. Assuming that all producers are taxed equally, the end result of corporate taxation is price inflation, plain and simple. All correct prices are a reflection of EVERY cost of doing business plus the profit incentive.

20 posted on 03/28/2013 5:38:19 PM PDT by presidio9 (Islam is as Islam does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Bill Clinton is full of it.


21 posted on 03/28/2013 5:44:27 PM PDT by Hoodat (I stand with Rand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Because the multiplier of a private sector dollar is three times that of a government sector dollar, Bubba. Period. End of sentence.


22 posted on 03/28/2013 5:48:51 PM PDT by StAnDeliver (Own it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmusedBystander

Bill’s greatest hero was lifelong segregationist and racist, William Fullbright.


23 posted on 03/28/2013 5:49:48 PM PDT by Hoodat (I stand with Rand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

The stupid little pervert. Bill, you perv, come to my town. I will meet you at McDonald’s, because I don’t want your filth in my home, and I will explain in detail and in a way that a 1st grader can understand, why tax increase are BAD for people and the economy, and why cutting taxes is good.


24 posted on 03/28/2013 5:51:49 PM PDT by FreeAtlanta (bahits.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Republicans Can't Explain How Tax Cuts Help.

Democrats Can't Explain How More Debt and Lost Jobs Help.

25 posted on 03/28/2013 5:57:57 PM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

But didn’t Bill Clinton sign a capital gains tax cut.


26 posted on 03/28/2013 6:02:17 PM PDT by fkabuckeyesrule
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Well, the republicans can’t really explain anything at all for that matter.


27 posted on 03/28/2013 6:04:48 PM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
"You think the only important thing to do is to cut taxes. Well, not all tax cuts are equal and there's a lot of evidence about what works and what doesn't."

Instead of money going into bureaucracies that mismanages a person's hard earned dollars as well as creating dependency on the tax payer's labor, the person/taxpayer gets to keep more of what they earn. Next question please.

Btw bleeding hearts, charity comes through the individual heart, not by a barrel of a gun being held by a uncaring bureaucrat pointed at the taxpayer.
28 posted on 03/28/2013 6:09:44 PM PDT by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Well, a simple look at history is all that is needed to see what today's mushy Republicans refuse to answer. Republican Calvin Coolidge was able to make it work!
1920s Income Tax Cuts Sparked Economic Growth and Raised Federal Revenues



It is often assumed that broad cuts in income tax rates only benefit the rich and thrust a larger share of the tax burden on the poor. But detailed Internal Revenue Service data show that the across-the-board rate cuts of the early 1920s-including large cuts at the top end-resulted in greater tax payments and a larger tax share paid by those with high incomes. Figure 1 focuses on those earning more than $100,000. As the marginal tax rate on those high-income earners was cut sharply from 60 percent or more (to a maximum of 73 percent) to just 25 percent, taxes paid by that group soared from roughly $300 million to $700 million per year. The share of overall income taxes paid by the group rose from about one-third in the early 1920s to almost two-thirds by the late 1920s. (Note that inflation was virtually zero between 1922 and 1930, thus the tax amounts shown for that period are essentially real changes).



The tax cuts allowed the U.S. economy to grow rapidly during the mid- and late-1920s. Between 1922 and 1929, real gross national product grew at an annual average rate of 4.7 percent and the unemployment rate fell from 6.7 percent to 3.2 percent. The Mellon tax cuts restored incentives to work, save, and invest, and discouraged the use of tax shelters.

The rising tide of strong economic growth lifted all boats. At the top end, total income grew as a result of many more people becoming prosperous, rather than a fixed number of high earners getting greatly richer. For example, between 1922 and 1928, the average income reported on tax returns of those earning more than $100,000 increased 15 percent, but the number of taxpayers in that group almost quadrupled. During the same period, the number of taxpayers earning between $10,000 and $100,000 increased 84 percent, while the number reporting income of less than $10,000 fell.
29 posted on 03/28/2013 6:17:01 PM PDT by Lucky9teen (Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.~Thomas Jeffer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Hey Bill!

Try this on for size.

The highest ever Federal Income Tax revenue occurred in 2007, under the Bush Tax Cuts!

The revenue reached those heights because the cost of doing business was near optimal, and those tax levels ENCOURAGED PRODUCTIVITY, INVESTMENT, AND CONSUMPTION.

When the Federal Income Tax is either 0% or 100%, the resulting revenue is ZERO!

As Art Laffer points out, there is an optimal level, somewhere in between.
The Bush Tax levels were very close to that optimum.


30 posted on 03/28/2013 6:21:45 PM PDT by G Larry (Which of Obama's policies do you think I'd support if he were white?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Anybody want to bet that Bill Clinton couldn’t explain the theory of supply and demand in even the most basic terms, nor how taxes affect demand, even if his life literally depended on it?


31 posted on 03/28/2013 6:26:01 PM PDT by Hardastarboard (Buck Off, Bronco Bama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Anybody want to bet that Bill Clinton couldn’t explain the theory of supply and demand in even the most basic terms, nor how taxes affect demand, even if his life literally depended on it?


32 posted on 03/28/2013 6:26:29 PM PDT by Hardastarboard (Buck Off, Bronco Bama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
It's easy to explain: GDP=C+I+x+G where C is consumer spending on goods and services, I is capital investment, X is net exports (exports minus imports..currently negative) and G government spending. Liberals follow the idea from John Maynard Keynes that increasing government spending creates an economic multiplier...one dollar of new spending yields more than one dollar in economic activity. This has two problems..Keynes himself said the economic multiplier could be zero and evidence that it exists in the way liberals want is nebulous at best. The source of the government spending has also to be considered. Governments get their money from either taxation or borrowing. Increasing taxes decreases Consumption as consumption is based on after tax disposable income. Borrowing creates a crowding out effect diverting investment from capital expansion to the purchase of government debt. If there is no economic multiplier then increased government spending decreases GDP. Putting more money into the hands of consumers by reducing taxes drives aggregate demand and spurs economic expansion and thus raises GDP. This video debunks Keynes multiplier.
33 posted on 03/28/2013 6:31:24 PM PDT by The Great RJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Repeal the 16th and cut taxes to zero. Let FedGov™ print what they want. Then it will be a fair race between the productive and the losers.


34 posted on 03/28/2013 6:36:16 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Great RJ

I like that. And why is Bill giving Republicans advice?


35 posted on 03/28/2013 6:47:42 PM PDT by Son House (The Heath Care Recovery Never Gets Here, Like The Economic Recovery, Easily Predictable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

It’s very simple: If you’re not getting a tax cut, you’re getting a pay cut. End of story.


36 posted on 03/28/2013 6:57:12 PM PDT by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Republicans should shout JOHN KENNEDY! There’s your explanation.” Kennedy is the president Clinton worshipped so much and screwed his friend so he could shake Kennedy’s hand when he was 18.


37 posted on 03/28/2013 7:14:13 PM PDT by Terry Mross (This country will fail to exist in my lifetime. And I'm gettin' up there in age.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

He should go go hell and take his entire rat party with him. I’m so sick of these people.


38 posted on 03/28/2013 7:17:29 PM PDT by jersey117
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Bill Clinton: Republicans Can’t Explain How Tax Cuts Help

Now that he's depleted nearly all of his brain cells there's not much point trying to explain anything to slick willy. Otherwise, he might be surprised to discover that he'd be enabled to smoke a lot more of the cigars he's given if they were not reallocated to applications for which they were not originally intended.



39 posted on 03/28/2013 8:30:56 PM PDT by clearcarbon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: funfan

Get real. If Bill lets you keep your own money, what could he give to other people to entice them to vote for him. Do you expect him to use his own money?


40 posted on 03/28/2013 9:18:31 PM PDT by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

“if the consumer has the alternative of buying his product elsewhere”

When is that not the case? Legal monopolies (which is what I meant by guns to heads), maybe, or temporarily during natural disasters. With or without substitutes you can always buy less. People act as if consumers have no choice but to buy gas, for instance, which firstly isn’t true. However, were it true, it wouldn’t mean they’d pay for the same amount of gas at higher and higher prices. There is no fixed amount of gas you must buy. Maybe there’s a floor below which you will not sink. But no one has any clear idea what this is. You might be surprised; look at how people lived under wartime rationing. Point is, when gas prices go up usually demand goes down, despite there being few alternative to the average driver. This is so because you can drive less, carpool, etc.

Monopolies can’t charge whatever price they wish, despite popular delusion. They still want to make the most profit possible, with or without competition. You can charge millions of dollars for a sandwich, assuming you control the world’s supply of sandwiches, and rich people or large enough groups of the less well off will pay it. Others will die without paying it, should that be their only means of sustenance. We’ve seen this throughout history, people dying instead of paying what’s beyond their means to pay. So there is a price too high. The same holds, less dramatically, for products having nothing to do with life or death, and potentially life or death products beyond life or death circumstances.

Ceteris paribus, if the supply clears at a higher price the price was set too low to begin with. This is true whether we’re talking about the most cutthroat industries with the thinnest profit margin, or the most heavily regulated industries with the least market-disciplined prices. Of course, when we’re talking about unfree markets we’re not talking about the best allocation of scarce resources; we’re talking about the most profit to be made, or whether the profit is going to the corporation, when it sets the price optimally (for its own pocketbook, not the consumer’s), or the gubmint.


41 posted on 03/29/2013 12:27:46 AM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

“Assuming that all producers are taxed equally, the end result...is price inflation”

I don’t know why we’d assume that. Anyway, no, it wouldn’t, if for no other reason than different lines of production are on different time schedules. But there are other reasons.

“All correct prices are a reflection of EVERY cost of doing business plus the profit incentive”

Yes, absolutely. And customers buying less, which ceteris paribus is the result of higher prices, adds to the cost of business. Higher cost means less employees and/or less profit. Which is what I was getting at by saying corporate taxes are carried back to the origin of production.


42 posted on 03/29/2013 12:50:27 AM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: central_va

Are you mad? Then it will be the spenders versus the savers. Given production relies vitally on saving, it’ll be nobody versus nobody because we’ll all be bums.


43 posted on 03/29/2013 12:53:43 AM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson