On Politics, We Can Always See the Whites of Their Eyes.
Pelosi: I am going to raise your taxes
by: Clyde Middleton posted: 2009-01-18 09:56:00
Viewed 1028 times. 3 Comments.
Subtitled: Understanding the revenue impact of Bush's tax cuts.
Obama first foreign-policy crisis looks like it is going to be the foreign nature of having people with power equal to his telling how it is going to be.
This town appears to be big enough for two queens: "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants Congress to consider repealing President George W. Bush's tax cuts well before they expire in 2010, in contrast to what President-elect Barack Obama is proposing. / In an interview aired Sunday, Pelosi said, "I don't want them to wait two years to expire because they have to prove their worth to me."
Earn their "worth" to you, dear? Get over yourself.
The qualified argument seems to be raising taxes on those making over $250,000 - Pelosi says yes, Bambi says no. It's a stupid argument, one bereft of an understanding of macroeconomics. Let's look at the Evil W Tax Cuts.
The main aspects of Bush's 2001 tax cuts, which are set to expire in 2010 are:
- A reduction of individual income tax rates from 15, 28, 31, 36, and 39.6 percent to 10, 15, 25, 28, 33, and 35 percent;
- An increase in the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000;
- A phased-in reduction in estate taxes, and a one-year repeal in 2010;
- A big expansion of tax-favored retirement savings plans.
Let's toss some real data in here, since all the libs can do is demonize Bush's efforts. Who pays personal income taxes? Here's the year before Bush took office (2000), the first year of his reductions (2001), and the latest available data (2006):
| Year | Income Top 1% | Percent of Fed'l Income Tax Top 1% | Income Bottom 50% | % Tax Bottom 50% |
| 2000 | $313,469 | 37.42% | <$27,682 | 3.91% |
| 2001 | $292,913 | 33.89% | <$28,528 | 3.97% |
| 2006 | $328,049 | 39.89% | <$31,987 | 2.99% |
What do we learn? The income tax burden shifted to those making the most money. Did it do it immediately? No, of course not. He understood that we are moving a multi-trillion dollar economy. You put the structure in place and the economy moves towards it. The top level earned more money in the end result - and paid more income tax as a result.
Dems look for quick, feel-good changes. In the long term, they always fail.
Let's add to these data the actual dollars paid by these groups (see Table 4 - Billion $$):
| Year | Total Income Tax Paid | Paid by Top 1% | Paid by Bottom 50% |
| 2000 | $981 | $367 | $38 |
| 2001 | $888 | $301 | $35 |
| 2006 | $1,024 | $408 | $31 |
We learn that the bottom 50% received an immediate tax cut in dollars, and that it continued in their favor throughout the term.
What about average tax rates within these groups and for these years? See Table 8:
| Year | Average Tax Rate (% AGI) Total | Average Top 1% | Average Bottom 50% |
| 2000 | 15.26% | 27.45% | 4.60% |
| 2001 | 14.23% | 27.50% | 4.09% |
| 2006 | 12.60% | 22.79% | 3.01% |
Average tax rates decreased and tax revenue increased. The average tax rate of the Top 1% reduced by a tad less than 17%. The rate for the Bottom 50% reduced by over 34%.
Reduced tax rates - increased income. What part of this is so hard to understand?
Related Articles
- Katie Packer, Exec Dir, Workplace Fairness Institute: “High Road”
- CBO's latest: TARP to cost us $109 Billion
- Tamar Yonah: Communist In The White House?
- GOP Talkers on EPA’s Backdoor National Energy Tax
Links to this post
Trackback url: http://patriotroom.com/article/pelosi-i-am-going-to-raise-your-taxes/trackback
Comments 3
dems on gun control: that's both funny and chilling ...
The Constitution was written to give the people mastery of the government; that has now shifted, and gun control is the last nail in the coffin on a free democracy.
Thanks for this post Clyde. Has anybody sent it to Nazi Nancy?
Have an opinion?
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
Publius' Newsstand
-
Update on CBO: Corrupt Dem leaders touting unof...
Thanks to Avery for the heads-up on today's atrocity rolling off Capitol Hill.Ranking Republican Paul Ryan responds to an NRO query about the news this morning: “The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that there is currently no official cost estimate. Yet House Democrats are touting to the press — and spinning for partisan gain — numbers that have not been released and are impossible to confirm.
Boy, a final official number that came in over a trillion bucks would really bite them in the a**.Views: 53 Comments: 0
-
McCain's lead over Hayworth shrinks to 7
Johnny Mac is also under the all-important 50% support level.The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of likely Arizona GOP Primary voters shows McCain ahead 48% to 41%. Three percent (3%) favor another candidate, and eight percent (8%) are undecided. Following the announcement that Sarah Palin would campaign for his reelection, McCain opened up a 53% to 31% lead over Hayworth in January. The two men were in a near tie in November.
By my math, McCain's lead shrunk from 21 to 7 in two months. Hmmm.Views: 44 Comments: 0
-
CBO: Obamacare costs $940 billion
And in the world of Washington speak, somehow spending that much cash actually lowers the deficit by $130 billion. I have a better idea. How about we just not spend $940 billion in the first place? After all, if you are trying to trim your budget, you don't go buying a Lamborghini on a credit card. One more thing. Isn't it funny how CBO can score a bill without an actual bill. Hmmm . . .Views: 56 Comments: 0
-
USA Today editors: The Slaughter Rule is a 'gim...
Keep in mind USA Today wholeheartedly supports this health care takeover, but even they are disturbed by "deeming" a bill passed without a vote in the House.[House] leaders are mulling a rule that would allow the chamber to "deem" the Senate's version of health legislation as passed, without actually having to vote on it. Imagine how useful this trick would be in daily life. You could make unpopular decisions without actually appearing to make them. That excruciating Thanksgiving dinner at your brother-in-law's? You "deemed" that you attended. . . . It's understandable that some House Democrats wouldn't want to cast a direct vote on the Senate bill . . . before moving to change it. But a procedure this transparently gimmicky just adds to the cynicism surrounding the bill and opens it up to unnecessary court challenges.
Views: 57 Comments: 0
-
Biden bombs at Correspondents' Dinner
Biden is funnier when he isn't trying to be funny. This stuff is so lame, he should have gotten the hook. More, if you can stand them, at the link. - "I just got back from five days in the Middle East. It's great to be back to a place where a boom in housing construction is a good thing." - "Liz Cheney is here tonight. Liz has been on a tear. Now she's questioning if Tom Brady is a Patriot." Meh, said the crowd. "What the hell, it was worth a try." - On moving to Washington: "I voted for public housing all my career -- never realized how good it actually is!"Views: 64 Comments: 1
-
Shocker: Boxer now trails Campbell in CA Senate...
Sure, it's within the margin of error, but Campbell is leading. The pollster moves the race to "toss-up."In hypothetical match ups with Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) in the general election, Campbell leads Boxer, 44% to 43%, while Boxer leads Fiorina, 45% to 44%, and tops DeVore, 45% to 41%. Both findings are within the survey's margin of error.
Views: 73 Comments: 0
-
GOP gears up for health bill lawsuits
Mark Levin is one, but other right-wing legal eagles (they have two right wings) are gunning for this abomination as well. It's the Slaughter Rule and the individual mandate in the crosshairs.The looming Congressional showdown over health care reform has set Washington’s legal war rooms whirring in preparation for court battles over any health legislation that moves towards President Barack Obama’s desk. Republican lawyers say they’re conducting research and drafting arguments for lawsuits that could be filed within days or weeks, particularly if House leaders decide to go forward with a “deem & pass” rule that would not permit a freestanding vote on the Senate-passed health care reform bill.
Views: 43 Comments: 0
-
GOP: We can kill 40% of the bill in Senate reco...
A nice, slow strangle in the Senate, if (a big if) it makes it out of the House.Democrats might like to think that health care reform is all but a done deal if it clears the House, but the Senate is where Republicans have been plotting for months to sentence it to a painful procedural death. Republican aides have been mining the Senate’s arcane parliamentary rules for an attack that aims at striking elements both broad and narrow from the bill, weakening the measure and ultimately defeating it. Their goal is to force changes that leave Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) without 51 votes to pass it, or at the very least, that drive it back to the House for a second vote that drags out the process and saps Democratic resolve.
Views: 67 Comments: 0
-
Major defection: Floor Whip Lynch "no" based on...
Lynch is not on The Hill's list - meaning he was considered a "yes" vote. Ah, toast in the morning ... smells like victory. FTA: Lynch, who serves as one of Pelosi’s key vote counters, said he also can’t support a proposed “deem and pass” procedure that would allow Democrats to vote to strip out controversial portions of the Senate bill and then “deem” that the entire package has passed without a second, direct vote. “It’s disingenuous,” said Lynch, who considers unfair a Senate provision to tack a surcharge on higher-end health plans. “It would really call into question the credibility of the House.”Views: 71 Comments: 0
-
Idaho first: Law forces AG to sue federal govt ...
Idaho took the lead in a growing, nationwide fight against health care overhaul Wednesday when its governor became the first to sign a measure requiring the state attorney general to sue the federal government if residents are forced to buy health insurance. Similar legislation is pending in 37 other states. Constitutional law experts say the movement is mostly symbolic because federal laws supersede those of the states. Um, no, it is not mostly symbolic. It's a 10th Amendment argument, you morons. The federal government has not right to operate in this area. It is reserved to the states.Views: 119 Comments: 4
Get Your PR Button!
More Articles By Clyde Middleton
- Katie Packer, Exec Dir, Workplace Fairness Institute: “High Road”
on 2010-03-18 with 38 views - Major defection: Floor Whip Lynch "no" based on Slaughter Rule
on 2010-03-18 with 71 views - Idaho first: Law forces AG to sue federal govt if HC mandate comes
on 2010-03-17 with 119 views - Survey of latest HC whip counts
on 2010-03-17 with 191 views - Walgreens: No new Medicaid in Washington - reimbursement below cost
on 2010-03-17 with 120 views - CBO's latest: TARP to cost us $109 Billion
on 2010-03-17 with 97 views - 5 minutes with your mom and her doc: HC reform is gonna hurt
on 2010-03-17 with 97 views - Pro-life Undecided Rep. Kaptur leaning "no"
on 2010-03-17 with 85 views - Good morning, Health Care!
on 2010-03-17 with 157 views - Cowboy AG Holder: We's gonna keel dat bin Laden
on 2010-03-17 with 74 views
Democrats, raise taxes, fund socialism and gun control. Up to you to figure out why gun control is so important to Democrats.