Tax cuts, why do the democrats hate middle class tax cuts?

Question

The middle class tax rate was cut under this administration leading to an extra $100 Billion in revenues and more job creation. Also, this administration increased the no tax rate bringing disposable income levels up in the poorest Ameircans. But yet democrats consistantly call for the repel of these sound economical actions. Can anyone explain thier reasoning?

The top 5% of wage earners pay over 85% of the American taxes, tax rates for the rich is up 1.75% under this administration. Tax rate for middle class is down 2.2% under this administration.

By the way, the $100 Billion came from the 2005 budget not from the 90's

Linus, the $100 Billion came from Bush not Clinton, Clinton was not President in the new millenium when the tax rates were changed. You have to think.

Answer 1

Okay, listen... I'm not really a democrat or a republican (I fall right smack dab in the middle of conservative and liberal) so this is an objective opinion.

There are so many things that need to be addressed. Are tax cuts wrong? Not if they're being given for the right reasons. But if tax cuts are being given to appease an unhappy public because of seriously wrong things that are going on, then they aren't a good thing.

It's like giving a child a toy so they won't get mad you forgot to feed them dinner.

Answer 2

Small, temporary middle class tax cuts (or rebates or pre-bates or payroll tax cuts) do not stimulate the economy. They never have, and they never will. They are wastes of time and money. What is needed is to make the Bush tax rates permanent. That would be a boon to the economy. The income tax cuts were more a matter of fairness. It is the supply-side tax cuts that really stimulate the economy.

Answer 3

The tax cuts have conferred the most benefits, by far, on the highest-income households — those least in need of additional resources — at a time when income already is exceptionally concentrated at the top of the income spectrum.

In the absence of the tax cuts, the deficit picture over the coming decade would look very different. Without the tax cuts, the deficit would be under $100 billion in most years. With the tax cuts, the deficit is projected to grow to more than $675 billion by the end of the decade.

Answer 4

SLAP YOUR TEACHERS FOR RUINING YOUR MIND

Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy, reckless spending and fiscal irresponsibility have produced a record budget deficit. This lack of leadership reduces flexibility to respond to future American crises, jeopardizes an already shaky dollar currency, interest rates will skyrocket, raises prices, weakens banks, lessens private sector spending and lowers future national income. He has sacrificed long-term economic growth for political purposes and to please his beloved wealthy base. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center calculated that 53% of Bush’s tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 went to the highest earning 10% of Americans.

President Bush argues that his cut in tax rates stimulate the economy. Only temporarily. So how far did his cuts trickle? Not much. Also, his lack of fiscal discipline illustrates no plan for long-term economic growth. Currently the growth rate is slow nothing to brag about. Despite a record high DOW, job growth in September was very poor and economic analysts forecast a very dismal and significantly below average growth for the third quarter. This could be the real October surprise and not Foleygate. On Oct. 27, a week before the midterm elections, the Bureau for Economic Analysis will officially announce the third quarter figures. This very well could be the Republican’s collapse. Read the full story.

Answer 5

Republican backed tax cuts for the middle class only appear to help the middle class, then you read the fine print and realize that at the end of the day, the richest are benefitting more than the middle class could ever dream. Democrats tend to read the fine print, and think through possible outcomes for LONGTERM consequences--that is why they oppose so many Republican-backed bills that seem so innocent on the surface (which is as far as most people go).

Answer 6

Democrats hating having people make stupid choices, and they dont like people starting shops, business, and the democrats should concentrate on absolute poverty people have no healthcare or adquate housing instead of looking sociology stats, and being in bed with lawyers that drive up the costs of building houses, cars, and other basic comsumer items. People make what there worth, and democrats dont realize that 95% of the population goes on to other things after the class arguement is made to people over and over. The poor dont pay taxes much because of taxation policies, but at the local level the wealthy get raped worse than at the national its called property taxes to build schools look like sports staduims. We need to control education costs, some forms of healthcare costs, and break up the public workers rackets making more than market wages for clerical work.

Answer 7

I'm a democrat and I support tax cuts. In 1962, Kennedy gave a tax cut to stimulate the economy and Reagan did a good job with the tax cuts.

Answer 8

Cutting taxes is great, but how are we going to reduce the deficit by cutting taxes and increasing spending? Interest payed on the debt hurts the economy more than reducing taxes helps. I know, we can get out of Iraq and that would save billions.

Answer 9

Where do YOU THINK THE $100 BILLION DOLLAR IN REVENUES CAME FROM? OUT OF THE SKY? It came from the last administration!!! Now YOUR PRESIDENT HAS CAUSED A $300 BILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT FROM A WAR THAT WASN'T NEEDED!!! WHAT DO YOU THINK IS GOING TO HAPPEN, REGARDLESS OF WHO IS IN OFFICE?!?!?

EDIT: Ummm....NO. You got tax breaks in 2002 - 2003. How did it come from the tax budget in 2005? It came from the Clinton Administration, whether you like it or not...

Answer 10

China has a thriving middle class. How much money do the Republicans need before they are satisfied.
Soon all the Republican thieves will be in prison.