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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (687307)	12/5/2012 11:56:37 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1584230

>> What was the difference between the '01 and '03 tax cuts? Wasn't the top rate decreased to 35% with the "03 cuts? Revenue seemed to go up steadily after the '03 cuts. The '01 cuts failed because Bush essentially went the Keynesian route in '01. The '01 cuts were aimed at low/middle income workers (remember the $400-600 rebates?) -- the effect of the rebates was to redistribute from producers to non-producers. The max tax rate was cut one point in the early years and the estate tax persisted under a phase-out provision. Essentially half of the rebate dollars were not spent. Basically, it was the Obama '08 stimulus (and mysteriously, it failed, THEN, too). In 03 dividend rates were cut, cap gain rates were cut, the highest bracket rate was cut from about 40 to 35%, and business investment incentives were created. Shortly after the 03 cuts took effect, we saw a surge in revenue. I'm not sure there has ever been stronger evidence of Keynesian failure, followed within two years of supply-side success. While the economy did ooze out of the recession after the 01 cuts, it was not nearly so strong as it should have been under the right economic conditions. In 03, Bush got it right and we saw 4-5 years of strong revenue growth under what otherwise would have been difficult circumstances. These guys claiming tax cuts don't work need to understand that they do work when they're done correctly. Bush, in 01, bowed to pressure from Ds and wanting too much to "get along" with them, failed to follow his instincts (as well as some advice he got from great economic minds). In 03, he got a do-over and nailed it. I doubt if the American people at-large will ever know this, because the collapse, a result of Democrat's blunders, happened on his watch.