…and the deficit not related. If all things being equal, had the Bush tax cuts occured and nothing else, no TARP, no added spending, wars, etc., we’d still be enjoying the surpluses from the Clinton years. So when you hear the liberal idiot talking heads complaining about the Bush tax cuts and their affect on the economy, your bullshit detector should be screaming at you.
You need to go to the linked site where there is an array of chart fu, with explanations, that are well done.
The Democrats always want to blame Bush for the deficits due to the tax cuts that were enacted in 2001 and 2003 and then extended in 2010. And this analysis puts to rest that what really happened was not a result of those tax cuts. Those tax cuts actually paid for themselves and then some.
All these asshole politicians are lying scum, but the degree of the lying and hypocrisy from the left is astronomical when the two are compared.
The question of the Bush Tax cuts ‘causing’ the deficits, and hence the ‘need’ to increase taxes on the ‘wealthy’ is one which Democrats spend many evenings discussing. Clearly, Bush was an insane tax-cutter without any good ideas and caused every problem mankind faces today, and frankly every problem we’ve faced for the last 40 years. He was just that bad.
However, a non-partisan look at the cuts indicates something quite different. On a standalone basis, taking out all other additional spending programs from the last 11 years, what we find is the tax cuts paid for themselves, and then some. In other words, the issue isn’t the cuts. The issue is all the additional spending which took place after the cuts. To be completely honest, and completely fair, not all the spending was by Bush, either. In fact, most of it was voted on with bipartisan support. Very little could be said to be purely Bush-related, let alone Republican-related.