Yes, tax cuts increase the deficit

[Benny B]

Yes, tax cuts increase the deficit

There are a couple of weird arguments that come up when you talk about tax cuts. One is that "tax cuts do not cause deficits. Spending does." This is pretty easy to test: If we cut taxes this year but leave spending unchanged, will anything happen to deficits next year? The answer, of course, is yes. They will go up. Fast.

Now, you could say that tax cuts don't have to cause deficits, and that's true. But then they need to be accompanied by spending cuts equal to their size. (The same goes for spending increases, of course, which can be offset by tax increases.) But the GOP is not proposing spending cuts equal to the size of the Bush tax cuts (and, to be fair, President Obama is not proposing spending cuts equal to the size of his reduced extension of the Bush tax cuts). So these tax cuts will increase the deficit by $3.9 trillion over the next 10 years.

For awhile, conservatives tried to dodge the need to propose spending cuts -- which are, after all, terribly unpopular -- by saying that the tax cuts would do the work for you: Since revenues were going down, spending would simply follow at some later point, like night comes after day. But as William Niskanen, former chairman of the libertarian Cato Institute, has argued, that theory wasn't just wrong. It was disastrously wrong.

"My study finds that there was a strong negative relation between the federal spending percent of GDP and the federal revenue percent of GDP from 1981 through 2005, even controlling for the unemployment rate," writes Niskanen. So when you look at the numbers, the reality is that when revenue went up, spending went down. And when revenue went down, spending went up. When Congress is being fiscally irresponsible, it simply is fiscally irresponsible, and it both cuts taxes and increases spending. And then when it needs to be responsible again, it cuts spending and increases taxes.

What's worse, Niskanen said, is that this belief has robbed the budget of its traditional guardians. "An increased belief in the 'Starve the Beast' assertion has substantially reduced the traditional Republican concern for fiscal responsibility," he continued, "leading to a pattern of tax cuts, increased spending, and increased deficits."

In the absence of offsetting spending cuts, tax cuts increase the deficit. And when a party is fooling themselves and their supporters into believing otherwise, they are embracing a theory that has been proven to increase the deficit. They are as much pro-deficit spending as they are pro-tax cuts.

By Ezra Klein

[Soul Crusher]

Ha ha ha.  You fucking tool.  Ezra Klein?

The 25 y/o fag JOURNOLIST who never held a job before? 

Ha ha ha. 

Keep making a complete ass of yourself you fool. 

[James]

Yes, tax cuts increase the deficit

There are a couple of weird arguments that come up when you talk about tax cuts. One is that "tax cuts do not cause deficits. Spending does." This is pretty easy to test: If we cut taxes this year but leave spending unchanged, will anything happen to deficits next year? The answer, of course, is yes. They will go up. Fast.

Now, you could say that tax cuts don't have to cause deficits, and that's true. But then they need to be accompanied by spending cuts equal to their size. (The same goes for spending increases, of course, which can be offset by tax increases.) But the GOP is not proposing spending cuts equal to the size of the Bush tax cuts (and, to be fair, President Obama is not proposing spending cuts equal to the size of his reduced extension of the Bush tax cuts). So these tax cuts will increase the deficit by $3.9 trillion over the next 10 years.

For awhile, conservatives tried to dodge the need to propose spending cuts -- which are, after all, terribly unpopular -- by saying that the tax cuts would do the work for you: Since revenues were going down, spending would simply follow at some later point, like night comes after day. But as William Niskanen, former chairman of the libertarian Cato Institute, has argued, that theory wasn't just wrong. It was disastrously wrong.

"My study finds that there was a strong negative relation between the federal spending percent of GDP and the federal revenue percent of GDP from 1981 through 2005, even controlling for the unemployment rate," writes Niskanen. So when you look at the numbers, the reality is that when revenue went up, spending went down. And when revenue went down, spending went up. When Congress is being fiscally irresponsible, it simply is fiscally irresponsible, and it both cuts taxes and increases spending. And then when it needs to be responsible again, it cuts spending and increases taxes.

What's worse, Niskanen said, is that this belief has robbed the budget of its traditional guardians. "An increased belief in the 'Starve the Beast' assertion has substantially reduced the traditional Republican concern for fiscal responsibility," he continued, "leading to a pattern of tax cuts, increased spending, and increased deficits."

In the absence of offsetting spending cuts, tax cuts increase the deficit. And when a party is fooling themselves and their supporters into believing otherwise, they are embracing a theory that has been proven to increase the deficit. They are as much pro-deficit spending as they are pro-tax cuts.

By Ezra Klein

Benny Douche Bag, Obama has ran up the debt more in the last year and a half than any other President in History!

[Soul Crusher]

After the Bush tax cuts, the govt got more revnue than ever.  the issue is spending, and that is where COMMUNIST-IN-CHIEF has zero credibility. 

[GigantorX]

Spending more than you take in will create debt and a deficit. You could repeal all the Bush Tax Cuts and you would still have a deficit. Just as 33386 said, the issue is spending. Always has, always will be. It is also the area that Obama said he would "look into" and instead has created more debt than anyone else in history and is running a titanic fiscal deficit. Raising taxes won't eliminate the deficit or keep this Govt. from running up huge amounts of debt. It will only make the deficit be a tad smaller and thus letting them borrow more.

Dumb Thread.

[Benny B]

Ha ha ha.  You fucking tool.  Ezra Klein?

The 25 y/o fag JOURNOLIST who never held a job before? 

Ha ha ha. 

Keep making a complete ass of yourself you fool. 

What does the author of the article have to do with the FACTS of said article, PEA BRAIN?  Particularly an author who is 5000% smarter than you?

I keep making a complete ass out of myself; I am a fool.

You should just ask Ron to make this your signature, PEA BRAIN. "Mr. 40+ Posts Per Day," EVERY day LOSER. lol

[Soul Crusher]

Moron.  The fact of that matter is that after the Bush tax cuts, the Fed Gov got record tax receipts.

The issue is reckeless spending and your gay adonis hero at 1600 PA. Ave. is DOA on that issue. 

There is simply no level of taxation to support what he is doing.   

[George Whorewell]

To be fair, I don't think that there was anything factual about that article.

[Benny B]

Spending more than you take in will create debt and a deficit. You could repeal all the Bush Tax Cuts and you would still have a deficit. Just as 33386 said, the issue is spending. Always has, always will be. It is also the area that Obama said he would "look into" and instead has created more debt than anyone else in history and is running a titanic fiscal deficit. Raising taxes won't eliminate the deficit or keep this Govt. from running up huge amounts of debt. It will only make the deficit be a tad smaller and thus letting them borrow more.

Dumb Thread.

What is "dumb" is your reading comprehension, dipshit.  No doubt "spending" is an issue, but the GOP has no credibility as it relates to spending, because they NEVER cut spending in a amount necessary to PAY for their tax cuts. Hence the Republican's absolutely ATROCIOUS record as it relates to deficit reduction.

Dumb bastard. Get the fuck out of this thread. 

[Soul Crusher]

What is "dumb" is your reading comprehension, dipshit.  No doubt "spending" is an issue, but the GOP has no credibility as it relates to spending, because they NEVER cut spending in a amount necessary to PAY for their tax cuts. Hence the Republican's absolutely ATROCIOUS record as it relates to deficit reduction.

Dumb bastard. Get the fuck out of this thread. 

Thats utterly hysterical considering the years of 1994-2000 when the GOP controlled congress. 

And BTW you kneepading clown - you cant even remotely defend this. 

[MCWAY]

Yes, tax cuts increase the deficit

There are a couple of weird arguments that come up when you talk about tax cuts. One is that "tax cuts do not cause deficits. Spending does." This is pretty easy to test: If we cut taxes this year but leave spending unchanged, will anything happen to deficits next year? The answer, of course, is yes. They will go up. Fast.

Now, you could say that tax cuts don't have to cause deficits, and that's true. But then they need to be accompanied by spending cuts equal to their size. (The same goes for spending increases, of course, which can be offset by tax increases.) But the GOP is not proposing spending cuts equal to the size of the Bush tax cuts (and, to be fair, President Obama is not proposing spending cuts equal to the size of his reduced extension of the Bush tax cuts). So these tax cuts will increase the deficit by $3.9 trillion over the next 10 years.

For awhile, conservatives tried to dodge the need to propose spending cuts -- which are, after all, terribly unpopular -- by saying that the tax cuts would do the work for you: Since revenues were going down, spending would simply follow at some later point, like night comes after day. But as William Niskanen, former chairman of the libertarian Cato Institute, has argued, that theory wasn't just wrong. It was disastrously wrong.

"My study finds that there was a strong negative relation between the federal spending percent of GDP and the federal revenue percent of GDP from 1981 through 2005, even controlling for the unemployment rate," writes Niskanen. So when you look at the numbers, the reality is that when revenue went up, spending went down. And when revenue went down, spending went up. When Congress is being fiscally irresponsible, it simply is fiscally irresponsible, and it both cuts taxes and increases spending. And then when it needs to be responsible again, it cuts spending and increases taxes.

What's worse, Niskanen said, is that this belief has robbed the budget of its traditional guardians. "An increased belief in the 'Starve the Beast' assertion has substantially reduced the traditional Republican concern for fiscal responsibility," he continued, "leading to a pattern of tax cuts, increased spending, and increased deficits."

In the absence of offsetting spending cuts, tax cuts increase the deficit. And when a party is fooling themselves and their supporters into believing otherwise, they are embracing a theory that has been proven to increase the deficit. They are as much pro-deficit spending as they are pro-tax cuts.

By Ezra Klein

Then please explain why Obama, not only wants to MIMICK the Bush tax cuts, he wants his name put on them so that HE gets credit for it.

[BM OUT]

What is "dumb" is your reading comprehension, dipshit.  No doubt "spending" is an issue, but the GOP has no credibility as it relates to spending, because they NEVER cut spending in a amount necessary to PAY for their tax cuts. Hence the Republican's absolutely ATROCIOUS record as it relates to deficit reduction.

Dumb bastard. Get the fuck out of this thread. 

EVERYTIME in the history of this country when they have cut taxes revenues to the government HAVE GONE UP!!Thats a fact.Sorry if Ezra Klein doesnt understand that,but thats a fact.It happened under Kennedy,under Reagan and under Clinton.Revenues go up not down.So,if revenues go up it MUST be spending that causes  deficits.

[MB]

Cut taxes 50%, cut spending 75%.  There's your additonal revenue. 

[Soul Crusher]

Cut taxes 50%, cut spending 75%.  There's your additonal revenue. 

x 1,000,000,000,000