Uh, ok. Lemme get this straight. You're blaming the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for hurting the economy even though the people that lied us into war in Iraq and said Afghanistan would be a cakewalk are the EXACT SAME people who said that tax cuts for the rich would be the best way to stimulate the economy, the wars would pay for themselves without any tax increases, and tax cuts would not raise the deficit. Fool me once and all that. The people-i.e liberals- who were against the tax cuts and the wars and pointed out that the deficit would rise immensely were right; the neocons were wrong.



Again, Obama has only been around for just under two years. You would have to show why lower estate and income taxes didn't produce the growth that the right-wingers said they would. What the change in tax policies did do very effectively was increase the income and wealth at the top end and increase the level of poverty in the country and increase what's euphemistically referred to as "job flexibility". Wages and growth remained stagnant even as corporate profits increased dramatically. Returning top marginal rates to Clinton era levels isn't going to kill the economy. This debate was already held in 1993. We have the evidence.



I do happen to make six figures a year and I am not concerned about a modest increase in taxes-primarily because I am not yet in that top 2%. But even if I were I wouldn't be concerned about going from 36% to 39%. The problem with this economy is simply not something which can be solved via supply side bromides. The problem is lack of demand. Per CBO, tax cuts for high earners are the least effective way to stimulate the economy. Just about every reputable economist also concedes that point. The middle class and working class are what drives the economy. If these people don't have secure jobs and good wages, things stagnate.

Nobody LIKES paying taxes. It has been my experience that the more some people make, the more they complain. But their complaints are not in and of themselves evidence that a progressive income tax system is a bad idea. But as shown, the overwhelming majority of small business owners will be unaffected by reversion to older tax rates.

Tax cuts for high earners are also one of the most effective ways to increase the deficit but usually all the deficit hawks grow rather silent about that. Supply side tax cuts and excessive deregulation of financial markets played a significant role in bringing us to the brink of disaster. Now is certainly not the time to repeat past mistakes. Even someone as right-wing as Greenspan says those tax cuts should expire.

So while the decision on whether to extend the tax cuts will have a lasting impact on the deficit and on how the nation’s tax burden is distributed, economists and tax experts say it is unlikely to offer much immediate relief for high unemployment and sluggish growth.

“It may have some small impact along the margins, but firms don’t hire based on tax breaks; they hire based on demand,” said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. “So a lot of the tax breaks are likely to be rewarding people and companies for what they were going to do anyway.”

Tax Cuts: Good Politics , Poor Stimulus