The Hidden Truth About the Bush Tax IncreasesNo image available
The Hidden Truth About the Bush Tax Increases
Made popular 1008 days ago in Business
realclearmarkets.com — The debate rages over whether our country can afford to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich. Progressives argue that the ballooning Federal debt is a legacy of these tax cuts.

There is one unreported flaw in this argument. As data from the IRS show, George Bush did not cut income taxes. He increased them. In fact, Bush increased income taxes not only for the rich but for at least half of all tax filers. Only the poor paid less income tax under George Bush than under Bill Clinton.
During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the Federal government collected a total of $5.66 trillion dollars in individual income taxes. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the Federal government collected approximately $7.45 trillion dollars in individual income taxes. The rich - that is, the top 1% of taxpayers - not only forked over a trillion dollars more to Uncle Sam under Bush than under Clinton, their share of the income tax burden increased from 33% to 38%.
During the eight years of the Clinton Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended rate of 20.6%. During the eight years of the Bush Administration the rich paid income taxes at a blended tax rate of 21.3%. Yes, the actual tax rate that matters when you fill out the bottom line of your tax return went up for the rich under George Bush.

Report This Post
Posted by james2044
Add To Favorites
115 Votes
Similar Issues
18 Comments
ShareThis
Do Democrats understand how America works?
No, they think in sayings that appeal to their groups
50%
lean to no
3.5%
Not sure
0%
Lean to yes
23%
Yes, the IRS is not telling the truth
23%
This is not a scientific survey, click here to learn more. Results may not total 100% due to rounding and voting descrepencies.
User Comments
Free
Posted 1008 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
You're absolutely correct the averages did not make a difference because the tax breaks went to the very rich. Had nothing to do with the average American. Don't attempt to fool the American people by playing with numbers. It was a tax break for the rich period.
hank10303
Posted 1008 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
NEW YORK - The number of very rich people in the U.S. grew last year at the fastest pace in at least a decade as their moves into international stock markets, real estate and alternative investments paid off.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12393877/

There are literally millions of millionaires in the United States. In fact, according to this 2005 article from MarketWatch, 8.9% of Americans are millionaires. That translates to roughly 2.6 million people.
http://ask.yahoo.com/20070215.html

While still well short of its all-time high of 9.2 million in 2007, this year's growth in the millionaire population is nevertheless welcome news for an economy still working to recover,"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/09/number-of-us-millionaires_n_491942.html

Its not that the rich paid more in taxes; its that Bush and company created more of them.

You were lied to yet again.
james2044
Posted 1008 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
what is wrong with people doing well? is that somwhow unamerica or is that something the Democrats don't want to happen?
TopSpin
Posted 1008 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Bush created more of them by taxing the middle class and passing it on to the Rich.

He subsidized the Rich with Middle Class dollars. Transfer of wealth
chanta
Posted 1008 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Blame Bush- some day (soon I hope) the words will change to blame Obama.
I can't wait for that day.
elziba
Posted 1008 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
There's nothing wrong with people doing well, but when is enough money enough money?
james2044
Posted 1008 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Do you earn as much as you can?

A major American ideal is to get ahead and the answer is never "enough".

The idea that their is "enough money" is from the Democrats to justify stealing from the productive people to give to those that vote for them.
hank10303
Posted 1007 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
There is nothing wrong with making money; but there is such a thing as gluttony. It is possible to have to much of anything; that is a lesson of wisdom and maturity. That fact is born out in the recent revelation that several of the wealthy thanks to Bush, are giving money away (probably to the dismay of many republicans).

The Rich Are Giving Their Money Away
http://griid.org/2010/08/06/the-rich-are-giving-their-money-away/

For two long the republicans have dressed their legislation and regulation or lack thereof in the disguise of tax cuts (that create jobs), or subsidize to spur growth, or intentionally leaving loopholes for corporation to find and exploit in the interest of competition. In fact its not of those things. Its corporate welfare and they have done it and want to continue to do it at the expense of the American people. True capitalism is the risk taking and responsibility of the business person or entity. Then why tax cuts - if these millionaire CEO's are so good (worth their salary) then they should be able to turn a fair and good profit without the aid of the government tax cuts. If republicans believed in capitalism as they like to boost then why did Bush sign the TARP into law? If tax cuts create jobs, the rich have had them for 8 years of Bush and two years post Bush - WHERE ARE THE JOBS?

ITS CORPORATE WELFARE.
james2044
Posted 1007 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Hank, do you think the Democrats will ever get enough of spending & decificts?

Working hard and doing well should be rewarded.
945call
Posted 1007 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Hank says, " The number of very rich people in the U.S. grew last year at the fastest pace in at least a decade "

That that means that people who weren't rich before are rich now. What a great country we live in!
hank10303
Posted 1007 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
james2044

Lets see how much of a command you have of the facts. On January 10th, 2009 what was the projected national budget deficit?
945call
Posted 1007 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Hank says, "Its not that the rich paid more in taxes; its that Bush and company created more of them."

First of all the new Millionaires" almost certainly fill the lower quadrant of the list of all millionaires. The total increased wealth brought to the party by these nes entrants was not even noticeable. The Difference between the Percentage of Taxes paid by the top 1% doesn't even include the new "millionaires, nor does the Top 5%. Like it or not you foolish attempt to uncover a big "LIE" failed.

The top 5% of Americans pay the lions share of the cost of running the government. It's a fact.

But your Exposé , invalid as it is, doesn't address the point of this poll.

Why can't you stay focused on the issue at hand instead of trying to prove to everyone that you know how to use Google?
...
hank10303
Posted 1007 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
ANSWER

The ongoing turmoil in the housing and financial markets
has taken a major toll on the federal budget. CBO
currently projects that the deficit this year will total
$1.2 trillion, or 8.3 percent of GDP. That total, however,
does not include the effects of any future legislation.
Enactment of an economic stimulus package, for example,
would add to the 2009 deficit.

1.2 TRILLION DOLLARS BEFORE OBAMA TOOK OFFICE AND BEFORE THE STIMULUS PLAN.

See page 11 of the CBO projections for the budget deficit 2009-1019
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9957/01-07-Outlook.pdf
Independent_Voter
Posted 1007 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
945CALL

How can you say Hank is wrong? How do you think they get the information about millionaires? Its a part of IRS record, so what do you mean they can't be counted. Why are you making up stuff to try to be right - face it, Hank got you good on this one and you are cold wrong. Grow up and be mature about it.
hank10303
Posted 1007 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
945 call

DON'T LIE TO BE RIGHT

YOU WROTE:
The Difference between the Percentage of Taxes paid by the top 1% doesn't even include the new "millionaires,

Did it ever occur to you that the information came from the tax returns that these "new" millionaire completed when they did their taxes?

Which means everything you based your counter debate on is wrong. If not prove it. I have the IRS to prove my points what do you have to prove yours?
945call
Posted 1006 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Indy says, "How can you say Hank is wrong? How do you think they get the information about millionaires? Its a part of IRS record, so what do you mean they can't be counted. Why are you making up stuff to try to be right - face it, Hank got you good on this one and you are cold wrong. Grow up and be mature about it."

Please try to get to your local Community College and take a reading retention class.

Hank said "There are literally millions of millionaires in the United States. In fact, according to this 2005 article from MarketWatch, 8.9% of Americans are millionaires. That translates to roughly 2.6 million people." and "Its not that the rich paid more in taxes; its that Bush and company created more of them."

So I said "The Difference between the Percentage of Taxes paid by the top 1% doesn't even include the new "millionaires, nor does the Top 5%. Like it or not you foolish attempt to uncover a big "LIE" failed." They were however part of the 8.6%.

By the way, taxes paid under Bush were paid with inflated dollars, probably 20%.
Which means the comparative amount was around 80% of the $7.45 trillion or $5.96 Trillion. That's just slightly more than the $5.66 Trillion of the Clinton years, but it was more. If you want to know where that more came from it was the increased blended rate, which accounted for about $50 Billion (.9% bof the $5.66 billion) but mostly from increased tax reveunues derived by Bush's reduction in the capital gains tax which tripled the tax reveue realized.
945call
Posted 1006 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Indy says, "How can you say Hank is wrong? How do you think they get the information about millionaires? Its a part of IRS record, so what do you mean they can't be counted. Why are you making up stuff to try to be right - face it, Hank got you good on this one and you are cold wrong. Grow up and be mature about it."

Please try to get to your local Community College and take a reading retention class.

Hank said "There are literally millions of millionaires in the United States. In fact, according to this 2005 article from MarketWatch, 8.9% of Americans are millionaires. That translates to roughly 2.6 million people." and "Its not that the rich paid more in taxes; its that Bush and company created more of them."

So I said "The Difference between the Percentage of Taxes paid by the top 1% doesn't even include the new "millionaires, nor does the Top 5%. Like it or not your foolish attempt to uncover a big "LIE" failed." The new millionaires were part of the 8.6%.

By the way, taxes paid under Bush were paid with inflated dollars, probably 20% over the eight years. Which means the comparative amount was around 80% of the $7.45 trillion or $5.96 Trillion. That's $300 billion more than the $5.66 Trillion of the Clinton years. If you want to know where that more came from it was the increased blended rate, which accounted for about $50 Billion (.9% bof the $5.66 billion) but mostly from increased tax reveunues derived by Bush's reduction in the capital gains tax which tripled the capital Gains tax reveue realized.
945call
Posted 1006 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Hank, you said that 8.9% of taxpayers are millionaires, Right?

You also said Bush added new millionaires. Right?

I said the NEW millionaires were most likely not in the top 1%. Reasonable?

I said they were not even part of the top 5%. That's because most new millionaires get to that plateau though incremental growth of their wealth. Very few go from less than a million to Hundreds of millions in one year. Reasonable?

So, new millionaires are not part of the top 5%, with maybe a handful of exceptions.
You will have 2 minutes to edit your comment.

Add your comments