Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Dietrich who wrote (32684)	2/13/2009 9:11:58 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 71588

Except Bush's tax cuts were retroactive, going back to January 2001. Some of the first batch of tax cuts, but not all of them, and none of the following two batch cuts, effected 2001 taxes at all. As for 3 straight years - Bush's third budget was the 2004 budget, federal revenues where higher in 2004 than in 2003 or 2002. Also revenue increase greatly AFTER the third round of tax cuts. I'm not suggesting that revenue increased greatly BECAUSE of the third round of tax cuts, but it shows how the state of the economy was decisive, revenue shot up at a time when we had the lowest rates for years. Not that "how high was federal revenue" would be a yardstick that I would measure a president by. Increasing federal revenue shouldn't be a primary goal. And again you fail to even address the point that the spending increases where larger than the tax cuts.