the bush tax cuts?

Question

What exactly were the Bush tax cuts?

Who did it benefit?

Did it help the economy?

Answer 1

The budget deficit is the lowest in 5 years. The tax cuts have been stimulating the economy, which has increased tax revenue.

9/11's damage to the economy and Clinton's last minute handout programs caused most of the budget deficit.

Answer 2

There was no budget deficit when Bush took office. He has run the largest deficits in history. Now the deficit drops a small amount and people want to celebrate? The National Debt has doubled under Bush, and is now over nine trillion dollars.
The tax cut mostly benefited the rich, they got a huge windfall. It may have stimulated the economy for a short period of time, but not enough to justify the large deficit Bush has run. The biggest stimulation was from the federal reserve lowering interest rates. Bush had nothing to do with that.

Answer 3

Honestly, I don't know much about the Bush tax cuts. It hasn't had any effect on the taxes I pay, but I guess I don't earn enough money. Mainly, they affected the rich. Supposedly those tax are responsible for jump starting the economy and generating record tax revenues, but I'm not sure. I think a lot of the economic boost was due to the Federal Reserve's response to the recession we had when Bush took office. They lowered the Prime Rate to record levels and spurred on the housing boom. Now, though, it looks like shady lending practices and people over-borrowing have caused the housing market to collapse. We may see another recession, just like when the Dotcom market collapsed during Clinton's presidency.

Answer 4

I would like to know the answer to that question as well. But I suspect that nobody, including Nobel laureate economists, really knows the answer. The "economy," which is increasingly global in nature, may well be too vast and complex for there to be a definitive answer to your question.

When people insist that tax cuts are responsible for whatever economic growth we are experiencing, I am skeptical for the following reasons. First, tax cuts seem to be the answer for "true believers," regardless of economic conditions. If there is economic growth, they claim the tax cuts are responsible. If there is an economic slow-down, they argue either that the slow down would have been even worse absent the tax cuts and/or that we need further tax cuts to stimulate the economy in order to prevent an even worse decline. In order for there to be a scientific, as opposed to ideological answer to a question, you have to be able to identify what events or circumstances would cause you to doubt your hypothesis. In other words, what would the economy have to do or look like for tax cut advocates to conclude that the cuts were not effective?

The second reason I am skeptical is that there seems no compelling reason to believe that the spending by people whose taxes have been cut is any more or less a stimulus to the economy than would be the spending of the same money by the government if it had kept that money and spent it on whatever. Is the stimulus caused by $40 spent at Walmart on, say, a CD player, any more or less than that caused by the same $40 retained by the government and spent on, say, highway construction?

I realize that it may not seem that I have answered your question. But I do hope that my observations at least cause you to question any simple, cause-and-effect answers you might get to your question.

Answer 5

Bush tax cuts were a variety of tax cuts, that benefited every tax payer. It's true the wealthy tax payers benefited the most, but only because they paid far more then the rest.

It's true. According to IRS data linked below, the wealthiest 10% of tax payers paid 68% of the income taxes, while they earned 44% of the income.

Contrary to what Snarky said above, the top 1% made only 19% of the nation's income while paying 36% of the income taxes. Again, straight from IRS info linked to below.

Any tax cut helps the economy. It leaves money in people's pockets to spend or invest. No matter what one does with that money, except maybe buying crack, it helps the economy.

The tax cuts have a short term effect of reducing gov't tax revenues, but because the economy is growing faster, the tax revenues catch up and surpass what would have been collected a few years later.

Answer 6

* Replacing the current tax rates of 15, 28, 31, 36, and 39.6 percent with a simplified rate structure of 10, 15, 25, and 33 percent

* Doubling the child tax credit to $1,000 per child and applying the credit to the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT);

* Reducing the marriage penalty by reinstating the 10 percent deduction for two-earner couples;

* Eliminating the death tax;

* Expanding the charitable deduction to non-itemizers; and

* Making the Research and Experimentation (R&D) tax credit permanent.

* Lowering the capital gains tax to 15%

It helped everyone and yes it helped the economy. Whenever taxes are lowered, it's always good for the economy. The more money people have in their pockets, they will spend it or invest it, both of which are good for the economy.

Answer 7

YEAH BUSH GAVE ME LESS THAN A $1.00 PER DAY AS A TAX BREAK....I THINK I'LL HAVE TO SPEND IT ALL IN ONE PLACE AND BUY THAT BRAND NEW HOUSE I'VE WANTED, BUT DIDN'T HAVE THAT EXTRA BUCK. What a joke.... are freaking kidding me, it's obvious where who he is trying to help with his GREAT TAX CUT PLAN. Stimulate this Bush.

Answer 8

The Bush tax cuts were a regurgitation of Reagan's
"trickle down" theory, which gave tax cuts to very wealthy.

Has it helped the economy?
That's still open for debate.

Has it helped MY economic status?
Nope - Not at all.
In fact, the middle class has been falling further behind in wealth under Republican control.

Answer 9

LOL, great submit. what share cases have you ever seen on Y/Q/A's the left asking who benefited from President Bush's tax cuts? in accordance to them, they comprehend of no one. they'd desire to run in some particularly unique circles to no longer comprehend of human beings reaping rewards. Do they truly need to pass decrease back to larger taxes? helpful they do via fact they do no longer innovations being screwed as long as everybody else is likewise.

Answer 10

Bush tax cuts benefitted mostly the top 1% of income earners, those with capital gains, and those with large estates. More that 50% of the bush tax cuts benefitted those in the top 1% of income. Under his cuts the top 1% paid 16% of the total federal tax but made 21% of the money. A fair tax would have them paying 21%.

Answer 11

how are we going to cut taxes with the huge deficit that we have? That is Reaganomics (lack of common sense) at its finest there.