Why do some Republicans think Democrats raise taxes when the largest budget increases come from Republicans?

Question

Both Reagan and Bush Jr. had the largest increases in the federal budget. True they didn't raise taxes, but they didn't cut spending to pay for it either.

Are Republicans being intellectually dishonest with themselves when they think that huge spending increases will not cause taxes to increase? (Borrowed money must be paid back eventually!)

Answer 1

Thats their idea of smaller government
smaller amounts paying back deficits they continually raise by their Spend and spend style of governing, let the next administation pay for it.

What do you do when you want to screw only the working people of your nation with the largest tax increase in history and hand those trillions of dollars to your wealthy campaign contributors, yet not have anybody realize you've done it? If you're Ronald Reagan, you call in Alan Greenspan.
Through the "golden years of the American middle class" - the 1940s through 1982 - the top income tax rate for the hyper-rich had been between 90 and 70 percent. Ronald Reagan wanted to cut that rate dramatically, to help out his political patrons. He did this with a massive tax cut in the summer of 1981.
The only problem was that when Reagan took his meat axe to our tax code, he produced mind-boggling budget deficits. Voodoo economics didn't work out as planned, and even after borrowing so much money that this year we'll pay over $100 billion just in interest on the money Reagan borrowed to make the economy look good in the 1980s, Reagan couldn't come up with the revenues he needed to run the government.
Coincidentally, the actuaries at the Social Security Administration were beginning to get worried about the Baby Boomer generation, who would begin retiring in big numbers in fifty years or so. They were a "rabbit going through the python" bulge that would require a few trillion more dollars than Social Security could easily collect during the same 20 year or so period of their retirement. We needed, the actuaries said, to tax more heavily those very persons who would eventually retire, so instead of using current workers' money to pay for the Boomer's Social Security payments in 2020, the Boomers themselves would have pre-paid for their own retirement.
Reagan got Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Alan Greenspan together to form a commission on Social Security reform, along with a few other politicians and economists, and they recommend a near-doubling of the Social Security tax on the then-working Boomers. That tax created - for the first time in history - a giant savings account that Social Security could use to pay for the Boomers' retirement.
This was a huge change. Prior to this, Social Security had always paid for today's retirees with income from today's workers (it still is today). The Boomers were the first generation that would pay Social Security taxes both to fund current retirees and save up enough money to pay for their own retirement. And, after the Boomers were all retired and the savings account - called the "Social Security Trust Fund" - was all spent, the rabbit would have finished its journey through the python and Social Security could go back to a "pay as you go" taxing system.
Thus, within the period of a few short years, Reagan dramatically dropped the income tax on America's most wealthy by more than half, and roughly doubled the Social Security tax on people earning $30,000 or less. It was, simultaneously, the largest income tax cut in America's history (almost entirely for the very wealthy), and the most massive tax increase in the history of the nation (which entirely hit working-class people).
But Reagan still had a problem. His tax cuts for the wealthy - even when moderated by subsequent tax increases - weren't generating enough money to invest properly in America's infrastructure, schools, police and fire departments, and military. The country was facing bankruptcy.
No problem, suggested Greenspan. Just borrow the Boomer's savings account - the money in the Social Security Trust Fund - and, because you're borrowing "government money" to fund "government expenditures," you don't have to list it as part of the deficit. Much of the deficit will magically seem to disappear, and nobody will know what you did for another 50 years when the Boomers begin to retire 2015.
Reagan jumped at the opportunity. As did George H. W. Bush. As did Bill Clinton (although Al Gore argued strongly that Social Security funds should not be raided, but, instead, put in a "lock box"). And so did George W. Bush.
The result is that all that money - trillions of dollars - that has been taxed out of working Boomers (the ceiling has risen from the tax being on your first $30,000 of income to the first $90,000 today) has been borrowed and spent. What are left behind are a special form of IOUs - an unique form of Treasury debt instruments similar (but not identical) to those the government issues to borrow money from China today to fund George W. Bush's most recent tax cuts for billionaires (George Junior is still also "borrowing" from the Social Security Trust Fund).
Former Bush Junior Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill recounts how Dick Cheney famously said, "Reagan proved deficits don't matter." Cheney was either ignorant or being disingenuous - it would be more accurate to say, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter if you rip off the Social Security Trust Fund to pay for them, and don't report that borrowing from the Boomers as part of the deficit."

Answer 2

Hold on and breathe. Tax cuts spur economic growth and when Reagan, Kennedy, did it they actually brought in more revenue. Our debt is roughly the same today as it was when Bush took office. When Bush took office it was 59-60% of GDP, now it is 60-61% of GDP. We can not just blame Bush, the deficate was close to 6 trillion when he took office. The interest alone would take it up to 8. We do not owe the entire national debt to other countries. Almost 3 trillion are owed to Social Security and Medicare. I will pay for this. Note the Democratic lead congress has not changed anything. Economics is not partison. Badash Newt Gingrich Balanced the budget, as I am sure you know all appropriations must originate in the house. Although this was not a true balance budget. They did not count the 200-300 billion of interest to funds like the Social Security trust fund. Year of year our National Debt always increased

Answer 3

Interesting question.

Why do 70% of USers believe in angels when not one has ever seen one?
Why did 52% vote for George W. Bush a second time when nothing he had done had succeeded the first time?
Why do 50% of them believe there was a connection between Sadam Hussein and Al Queda when there was no such connection?
Why do men believe that so-called conservatives spend less when just today a 1.3 trillion dollar debt, not the 200 billion, claimed by the Administration, has been discovered to have been run up by the Bush Administration ths year alone?

Clearly someone has caused and made effective a disconnection between what is real and what they want their potential victims, enablers and apoligist victims to believe.

Failure of realism this massive I suspect would have to be caused or deliberately worsened by liars, since normally men would gain information fairly quickly that would dispel any confusion they might be suffering concerning the practicality or impracticality of what such "leaders" were actually accomplishing (or not accomplishing).

The pro-imperial-president postmodernists of media certainly bear the brunt of the blame in this. Those who follow any president around treating his every word as if it were news and abetting tyranny are clearly very guilty of providing an echo and not fully disclosed information on which citizen voters might make a choice.

But the problem is far worse and far mre a case of deliberate distortion, lies and pseudo-religious doctrinal guiltiness also. Why is nit not news that all programs beneficial to any group except corporate, media and bureau millionaire CEOs are being cut--and money stolen from citizens and being poured into unworkable weapons systems, the pockets of incompetent or impotent contractors and administration bribers, and the aggrandizement of republican political powers.

Answer 4

You are using false logic, but of course that does not surprise me.

Raising taxes is taking and is not related whatsoever to budget increases. By the way, compare this congress budget plans with any in the last six years, this one is a huge increase, and I cannot figure out what we are getting for it, since they hide everything from us.

Congress needs to vote on each individual issue so we can see what they are truly doing.

Answer 5

Because they repeat 20 year old Republican mantras from the Reagan era - rather than learning the Facts.
Since the war began in March 2003 - Republicans have also voted against funding for soldiers' body armor, traumatic brain injuries, transition of permanently injured, etc.
The list is longgggg - and those who are paying attention KNOW that Dems have consistently voted FOR our Troops - while Repubs have voted to shortchange them.

Answer 6

I cannot find anything where the Democrats were complaining about or fighting against these budget increases.

Perhaps you have sources for that?

Also, I'm not having luck finding all the tax reductions passed by the Democrats when Clinton had a Democrat congress. All I can find is a tax increase. Can you help me locate the tax reductions? I'm especially looking for the middle class tax reductions that were the centerpoint of Clinton's campaign.

Thanks in advance for the help.

Answer 7

Republicans spend like spoiled brats on their daddy's credit cards. Bush Jr and Reagan are responsible for the vast majority of debt this country has.

They didn't give out tax cuts. They gave out TAX SHIFTS. All that deficit spending will eventually have to be paid by our children and their children, and paid with interest.

Answer 8

Of course it's dishonest and reagan cost bush Sr. dearly if you remember the Bush 1 economic abyss, which was caused not so much by his policies but the bills becoming due from Reagans...and there is no intellectual dishonesty involved, it's flat out lying and they are well aware of it

Answer 9

I have failed to understand Republicans and their thought process. How they relate themselves so easily with all bad guys and are able to convince themselves that they are correct is a big achievement. Like wise I am sure they are conveniently misleading people on the taxes front too. It is in the hands of the Americans to choose how they want to live - with Republicans or Democrats.

Answer 10

Unfortunately,many people today,have very short attention spans.Bumper sticker length slogans are all they can digest.This has been what the Republicans have known and exploited for decades.