How Is It Possible That Bush Has Cut The Federal Deficit In Half?

Question

Like he claimed in the state of the union.

Note: He claims that it has already been done.. not that he will do it.

Answer 1

By getting people employed after the Clinton Recession.

Bush's tax cuts were designed to help businesses so they could hire people, turning those people into productive taxpayers instead of a tax burden. He wisely reversed what Democrats insisted was the next "soup line" kind of economic collapse.

The tax cuts were also designed, to some extent, to help the common taxpayer by giving some back. That improves the mood of the taxpayer and improves their willingness to engage in the economy, thus increasing sales tax revenues. The more of their own money they get to take home, the better they feel about spending it on things that get other people employed and productive.

Answer 2

The budget deficits have been lower than predicted, due to the increased tax revenues coming in. The increased revenues are due to the good economy we've had that was jump started and buoyed by the Bush tax cuts.

This economic growth phenomenon has occurred after every time a supply-side economics tax reduction was implemented. This is the basis of the Laffer curve, which shows that excessive tax rates actually reduce tax revenues.

The 2006 budget deficit was about half of what was predicted because of the increased tax revenues. That's what he was talking about.

Answer 3

No President cuts the deficit, although it has been proven repeatedly that tax cuts will lead to increases in tax revenues. Tax receipts have increased rapidly following the tax cuts. Either taxpayer receipts rise faster than Congressional spending (mostly provided by the wealthy), or the deficit will widen ever further. Congress has never heard the word "cut." Spending cuts do not exist in D.C., only cuts in projected spending. Only in D.C. can Congress raise spending, yet have it be seen as a cut. Government spending has exploded by over 40% in the last 6 years, yet it is never seen as enough. Congressmen crave our tax money like addicts do Crack. They are addicted to spending.

These guys live in La-La Land.

Answer 4

If you consider the year of '02, the budge was around $500 billion in the red. Mostly, it was due to the fact that even when times are hard, the gov't does not want to reduce its spending. Now that times are booming and money is flowing in, the deficit is around $250 billion. The gov't still needs to constrain itself more in its spending and make a $0 deficit.

Answer 5

I would like to know that myself. The deficit is almost twice as high as it was when he took over.. lol

He was referring to what it was projected to be after his second year in office. This was the rationale, the deficit is X amount, if I increase it to XXXX then cut it to XX I have cut the deficit in half...

What a furhead!

Answer 6

increased tax collections, probably, due to the roaring economy... Note - the federal deficit is a short term measurement, whereas the national debt is the total, cumulative amount of money we're in the hole. I think the national debt has been getting progressively worse, not better.

Answer 7

From the extra revenue that was created through the tax cuts. When people have more money they spend more and they pay taxes on the things they buy.

Answer 8

by cutting taxes he put more money in the hands of the people, in return the people spent more and by doing that the goverment collected more in sales taxes and that has inable bush to pay off our deficit faster

Answer 9

He hasn't cut the federal deficit in half. He doesn't count his
spending on the Iqar War.

Answer 10

He claims to know a lot of stuff. Must we bring up the weapons of mass destruction? That man doesn't know what he's talking about. He probably doesn't even know what the federal deficit is.