Tuesday, October 16, 2007
What's the Cause of This?
I don't know for sure what's the cause of these bits of good news. I'll guess marginal tax rate reductions, for the rich. My smarter friend in Chicago says there is about an 18 month delay in economics between the action taken and first results. Let's see, what occurred about a year and a half before the start date of these two charts? That would be about March of '02. Hmm.
Remember all the bad press the marginal tax rate cuts got years ago? Man, were those guys morons.
It would be best if there was no deficit spending and better if the reduction in our deficit spending was because we were spending less rather than taking in more, but it's not. We're spending just as fast as we ever were. Still, I'd rather be heading towards a balanced budget rather than away. Too bad we've overspent to the tune of about 10 trillion dollars. That's a pretty hefty national debt. Are we making the interest payments OK?Labels: Bush Tax Rate Cuts
# posted by Roger Fraley @ 11:13 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
Rog,
Does this figure include the costs of ongoing operatiomns in Iraq and Afghanistan?
T
Does this figure include the costs of ongoing operatiomns in Iraq and Afghanistan?
T
# posted by 
: 6:06 AM
: 6:06 AM
I don't know. Economics is beyond me. But spending on the military wouldn't change the revenue numbers.
Tony,
deficit spendingregardless of the purpose would have to be taken into account, wouldn't you think ?
The tax cuts, are a successful Bush policy that the democrats want to ruin.
Unreal.
deficit spendingregardless of the purpose would have to be taken into account, wouldn't you think ?
The tax cuts, are a successful Bush policy that the democrats want to ruin.
Unreal.
Tony,
No, it doesn't. It also doesn't count the interest.
So while the official deficit for this fiscal year is only $167B (only), over half a trillion was added to the national debt.
Roger,
You are flat wrong on that. Since military hardware is produced by the private sector, a reduction in spending on the military would most certainly result in a drop in the revenue numbers.
No, it doesn't. It also doesn't count the interest.
So while the official deficit for this fiscal year is only $167B (only), over half a trillion was added to the national debt.
Roger,
You are flat wrong on that. Since military hardware is produced by the private sector, a reduction in spending on the military would most certainly result in a drop in the revenue numbers.
Mike, I see how US military spending would grow the economy and get more tax revenue, but I was talking about a 'hidden' deficit spending on the war effecting that deficit chart but NOT effecting the chart on revenues. Still, you've probably forgotten more about economics than I know, so I guess I could be wrong even in this different sense.
Ok, I'm not sure how you get that from your original statement. But the current comment is accurate enough.
In fact, it is just the opposite. There is hidden spending on the war that doesn't show up in the deficit numbers, but it most certainly shows up on the revenue chart.
In fact, if we accept your theory that it takes about 18 months before an action starts to have it's effect, take a look at your revenue chart and notice that it starts increasing sharply in September of 04. Hmmm, I wonder what happened 18 months before that?
Post a Comment
In fact, it is just the opposite. There is hidden spending on the war that doesn't show up in the deficit numbers, but it most certainly shows up on the revenue chart.
In fact, if we accept your theory that it takes about 18 months before an action starts to have it's effect, take a look at your revenue chart and notice that it starts increasing sharply in September of 04. Hmmm, I wonder what happened 18 months before that?
<< Home
