George Bush Doesn’t Like America
Tweet
Who does he want to cut taxes for? The middle class? The lower class? No sir, he wants to cut taxes for corporations. Right before the little bugger skips out of office, he wants to screw us over financially one more time. Any Democrat who votes for this, and the Republicans who I’m sure will, is a turd.
President Bush said yesterday that he is considering a fresh plan to cut tax rates for U.S. corporations to make them more competitive around the world, an initiative that could further inflame a battle with the Democratic Congress over spending and taxes and help define the remainder of his tenure.
A turd.
Bush will try to sell this as a boost to small business, but make no mistake – this is targeted at the GEs, Exxon-Mobils and other fattest of fat cats that in turn fill up Republican party coffers with their filthy lucre. We’re in the middle of a war, a war whose costs are sinking us day in and out in debt, and the response of the Republican party is to give the robber barons another truckload of free money.
What a disgraceful man George W. Bush is. No wonder his father is so embarrassed by his failed presidency.
24 Responses to “George Bush Doesn’t Like America”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
The US has higher corporate tax rates than Europe. Not good.
The corporate tax rate is also regressive, since it is paid for primarily through higher prices and lower employment costs.
Adam, you can explain to a liberal until you’re blue in the face that only individuals pay taxes and that any corporate taxes are passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. It won’t matter.
Jay, you do realize that corporations are defined as “individuals” in the law, right? Moron.
jay and adam have apparently never heard of S corporations.
Hooray For Tax Cuts!
Hooray! New tax cuts. Despite the ever growing national debt and deficit, the continued need to fund the Iraq war, and the apparent need to spend some money on our infrastructure (as was made apparent by first Katrina and then the collapse of the M…
But John Edwards has!
And I know you guys don’t read news that challenges your worldview, but it turns out that tax cuts are working.
I read your article. It says revenues are up. It does not say that “tax cuts are working.”
This is the same sort of argument as “there have been no new attacks on NYC, so clearly the terrorists have been routed.”
Bush wants to give more of America’s treasure to the billionaire CEOs of corporations at the very same time Americans are getting killed while driving their cars on our underfunded national infrastructure.
Sounds like a big loser for Bush to me.
Oh, I forgot. Revenues going up is a BAD thing according to Democratics. My mistake…
You honestly believe treasury receipts are in no way affected by tax policy? Really? Really?!?
“And I know you guys don’t read news that challenges your worldview, but it turns out that tax cuts are working.”
The Baseline CBO forecast does not include well, amongst a number of things- IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN. The reality is the Bush Bank will be in debt 1.7 trillion dollars over the next decade at their current rate of rampant stupidity, putting it mildly.
Lessons learned? Nah. At least not according to our challenged reader. Oh whoops, whats this?
NEW CBO DEFICIT ESTIMATE INDICATES THAT WITHOUT THE TAX CUTS, THE BUDGET WOULD BE BALANCED
I’m saying that your article doesn’t say conclusively that tax cuts are working. It is also likely that the deficit is reducing in spite of these precious tax cuts.
Yet another winning argument. Please keep insisting that corporations pay too much in taxes.
Pretty,
pretty,
pretty,
please.
Oh, and thanks for answering the question on how to pay for a hefty slice of universal healthcare. Well played.
You honestly believe treasury receipts are in no way affected by tax policy? Really? Really?!?
No, not really.
Of course tax policy affects treasury receipts. What’s entirely bogus is the snake oil certain conservatives keep peddling that “reducing taxes increases revenue!”.
This, like inventing perpetual motion machines, is the province of cranks and charlatans.
Uh Oh, the CBO (under Democratics) tells us we can do without tax cuts. Next, you’ll tell me that the NRA opposes increased Gun Restriction. Shocker!!! In order for the CBO’s analysis to be valid, you’d have to believe that the economy would have grown at the exact same rate as it has been without the economic stimulus of tax cuts. Which, according to every economic textbook ever written, just isn’t so.
And Quaker, surely you’ve heard of the Laffer Curve. It’s got more “consensus” behind it than Global Warming. The Curve does presume that you can cut taxes to the point that revenues will eventually diminish. But as the most recent evidence tells us, we have not reached that point yet.
SaveFarris, you are clearly an idiot. There is a well understood idea of taxable income elasticity, but the tax rate at which the revenues begin to fall is actually about 65% (see Paul Pecorino, “Tax Rates and Tax Revenues…,” The Journal of Monetary Economics, 1995). In other words, we can raise taxes for a long, long time before we start to see a decline in Federal receipts.
The fact is that the Laffer Curve, as practiced by conservatives, is probably one of the most discredited pieces of economic hogwash that exists. Even David Stockman, who was primarily responsible for promoting it under Reagan, admitted that it was baloney. I would expect you to know that but your conservatism probably doesn’t move you beyond your La-Z-Boy.
I think corporate tax reciepts are somewhere near 250 billion which is a pittance. I would have no problem lowering their tax rate if we close the loopholes that allow them to dodge paying taxes. More importantly the budget can get balanced if we cut these earmarks at the knees and cap growth to inflation. We’re heading towards an iceberg in entitlements and conservative bullshit about perennial tax cuts as well as liberal unwillingness to revisit spending programs let alsone halting the creation of new ones doesn’t help.
And Quaker, surely you’ve heard of the Laffer Curve. It’s got more “consensus” behind it than Global Warming.
Yes, I’ve heard of it. No, you’re mistaken. There aren’t any actual economists who stand behind that fantasy.
Check with Bruce Bartlett if you don’t believe me.
And Vic touches on a very important disctinction: conservatives typically quote the highest marginal corporate tax rates while ignoring actual rates paid.
Farris, truly you are a master of making shit up. The CBO is one of the few agencies left that can make a credible claim to being non-partisan. Like a true con, you only object to their findings when they run counter to your ideology, and given Bush’s fiscal irresponsibility, that’s pretty often.
Once again, because it cannot be repeated often enough, cons are utterly full of crap.
What’s entirely bogus is the snake oil certain conservatives keep peddling that “reducing taxes increases revenue!”.
Actually Quaker, liberals are the ones who talk about revenues declining because of tax cuts. The fact is, taxes have been cut and revenues still increased. It doesn’t mean that revenues increased because of reductions in tax rates, what it does however, is expose the lie that liberals tout all the time which is “tax cuts = deficits.”
Jay, you do realize that corporations are defined as “individuals” in the law, right? Moron.
I could give a rats ass what they’re defined as in the law. A corporation is an entity, nothing more. It is not a person. How many times have you heard people bitching about the fees they have to pay for cell phones, internet access, cable and satellite. Those are often the result of certain “corporate taxes” that are levied against those companies. They in turn, simply pass the cost on to us.
It’s not that difficult a concept to grasp.
Those are often the result of certain “corporate taxes” that are levied against those companies.
So the corporations got their tax cuts, and my fees didn’t go down; conversely, they went up.
You can say that corporations are passing their levied taxes onto us the consumer, but they’re not passing their tax relief onto the consumer…they’re just making more profits.
Actually Quaker, liberals are the ones who talk about revenues declining because of tax cuts. The fact is, taxes have been cut and revenues still increased. It doesn’t mean that revenues increased because of reductions in tax rates, what it does however, is expose the lie that liberals tout all the time which is “tax cuts = deficits.”
Holy cats, Jay. That’s not just apples and oranges you have there. You’ve got the whole freakin’ fruit basket.
First, tax revenues just about always go up. They go up when you cut taxes. They go up when you raise taxes. They go up when tax rates stay the same. You can look it up.
Why? Because GDP generally goes up, the size of the workforce goes up, and productivity goes up.
Now when anyone says “See? Tax rates went down and revenues went up!” they’re telling you a tale that’s as obvious as “The sun came up in the east today!”
Now here’s where it gets really hard to understand, Jay, so try to stay with me: If the feds reduce the tax rate, they get less money than if they didn’t cut taxes. See how that works? The government takes less money, they get less money.
And if they get less money and keep spending money, what happens?
Bueller?
You can get phone/internet/and television bundled for something like $30-$40 in Europe (France, at least)and the internet speeds are much higher than those in the U.S., too. Maybe, just maybe, cell phone rates, cable costs, high speed internet charges, are all sky high in the U.S. for miserably poor performance because of the monopolies and anti-competitive protections afforded by clowns like Mike Powell when he was head of the FCC. It’s a significant factor in the dust up over net neutrality and it’s why I won’t go near an iphone until Apple (or hackers) decide to make it region free.
“And Quaker, surely you’ve heard of the Laffer Curve. It’s got more “consensus” behind it than Global Warming.”
Do you even know what the Laffer curve says? Of course not, cause you’re fucking stupid, which is why you vote Republican.
The Laffer Curve doesn’t say cutting taxes will increase revenue. It says there is an optimal point to set taxation to maximize revenue. Also, no one knows what this point is, there is no consensus regarding the optimal level of taxation. In fact, it varies depending on income level of the people being taxed.