Quote:
Originally Posted by 12clicks
"""Moreover, according to the FY 1997 Clinton budget submission, individual income tax revenues as a share of GDP will be lower during the first four years of the Clinton tax increase, which include the effects of the 1990 tax increase, than under the last four years of the Reagan tax changes"""
|
Or we could look at that and say, it took TWO tax increases to reverse the damage or 8 years before they could balance out things and give us a surplus.
Why do they/you ignore the other 4 years? AFTER the increases, when we know the results?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 12clicks
"""The economic benefits of ERTA were summarized by President Clinton's Council of Economic Advisers in 1994: "It is undeniable that the sharp reduction in taxes in the early 1980s was a strong impetus to economic growth." Unfortunately, the Council could not bring itself to acknowledge the counterproductive effects high marginal tax rates can have upon taxpayer behavior and tax avoidance activities."""
|
However they ignored the record deficit it created. So in a way, the Gov spending money to cover its ass 'one way or another' seems to pave the way for economic recovery by those standards.