Effects of the Bush Tax cuts

So How Did the Bush Tax Cuts Work Out for the

David Cay Johnston | Sep. 24, 2010
08:02 PM EDT


  1. 1.
    Average incomes fell.
    Average taxpayer income was down $3,512, or 5.7 percent, in 2008 compared with
    2000, President Bush’s own benchmark year for his promises of prosperity
    through tax cuts.  
  2. 2.
    The average annual GDP
    (Gross Domestic Product) growth dropped by one-quarter.
  3. The average annual GDP
    (Gross Domestic Product) growth dropped by one-quarterThe tax cuts cost $1.8
    trillion in the first eight years, according to an analysis by the Tax Policy
    Center, whose reliability the last administration went out of its way to praise
  4. In the two years since 2008, the cuts’ total cost grew to $2.3
    trillion, the Tax Policy Center estimated.
  5. One of every eight dollars of the tax cuts went to
    the 1 in 1,000 taxpayers in the top tenth of 1 percent, the annual threshold for
    which was in the $2 million range throughout the last administration.
  6. Now let’s look at wages, the source of most people’s income. In
    2008 the average taxpayer made $58,000. That was $5,100 less than in 2007, a
    decline of 8.1 percent.
  7. The number of taxpayers
    reporting any wages in 2008 was 1.26 million fewer than in 2007,
    a scary figure when you consider that most people do not expect to be out of
    work for an entire year and that the population grew by more than a percentage
    point. In August 42 percent of the unemployed — 6.2 million people — had been
    out of work for 27 weeks or more, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said. The
    average for all jobless workers was 33.6 weeks of unemployment, the equivalent
    of going from New Year’s Day through August 23 without a paycheck.
  8. The number of taxpayers
    with incomes below $100,000 with any wage income fell in 2008 by 1.8 million.
    Because married couples file many tax returns, this means more than 2 million
    people who worked in 2007 earned no wages in 2008.
  9. Those reporting negative
    incomes quadrupled from less than 600,000 in 2000 to nearly 2.5 million in
    2008. Their losses worsened slightly from -$64,000 on average to -$66,000.
  10. The number of people
    reporting incomes of $200,000 or more but legally paying no federal income
    taxes skyrocketed in the second Bush term. A decade ago it was fewer than 1,500
    taxpayers; in 2000 it was about 2,300. This high-income, tax-free group jumped
    to more than 11,000 in 2007 and then doubled in 2008 to more than 22,000.
  11. In 2008 nearly 1 in
    every 200 high-income taxpayers paid no federal income tax, up from about 1 in
    1,500 in 1998.
  12. The share of high
    incomes that were untaxed increased more than sevenfold to one dollar of every
  13. Examining performance
    against the promises, what do we find? Overwhelming evidence that the tax cuts
    of 2001 and 2003 made us much worse off.

6 responses to “Effects of the Bush Tax cuts

  1. Steve

    August 2, 2012 at 15:40

    if tax increases stimulate the economy are good for us, why not just up the rate to 100% and bring on the good times. we call all sit around eating bon bon’s, rainbow stew and free Bubble Up while we all wait for our government checks! That’s your Progressive problem, somebody has to keep working to provide the income for all you free loaders to steal. Once you remove all the incentives none of the workers will continue to be fleeced!

    • angrymanspeaks

      August 2, 2012 at 21:17

      Seems pretty sad that a hard worker like yourself would just stop playing if you don’t get to keep all the marbles. By taking away the incentive I assume you mean the right to hoard vast wealth while others suffer. The right to stand by and watch as your nation becomes the most war-mongering country in history. As our military invades and terrorises yet more nations unable to defend themselves from our “Help”. The right to drive multiple millions of Americans into ever deeper poverty so you can brag about what a sharp business man you are. And probably the right to shove your Right-Wing religion down our throat. Yeh; I guess that would tend to spoil all your fun; wouldn’t it?

  2. Steve

    August 3, 2012 at 13:42

    so instead of just ranting about how un-American I am and continue to throw names at me that aren’t true why don’t you try intelligently discuss the issue and answer my question. Defend your indefensible position. If a little comfiscation is good, why not comfiscate it all and bring on your supposed utopia? you can’t defend it because eventually all the providers will quit because you’ve takebn away all the incentives to work hard and the results of helping the true needy, not this bunch of lazy lay on your back do nothings that want to keep their hand in my pocket instead of getting up off their asses and getting their own. Go ahead and defend it without name calling. You can’t, you’ll just continue to portray me as something I’m not to justify your own indefensible position as all you libs do. The Soviet Union proved that years ago. Even China has morphed into a Capitalist/communist society. Your BS has failed every time it’s been tried. You can’t get something for nothing. If you are getting something without working for it then someone else isn’t getting what they DID work for.

  3. angrymanspeaks

    August 4, 2012 at 01:08

    Well Steve,

    First I would like to point out that not once in my previous reply; did I call you a name; any name. Not even your own as I assumed that you already knew that. You can take a minute to peruse the comment again if you feel the need. I’ll wait; Dum de dum de dum dum de do; You back? Good because before I go on; I really need to mention something. I usually don’t critique other writers spelling because it is so often just a typo when it happens in comments. I do it all the time. But this is the second or third time that you have used the word Comfiscate and I feel that I would be remiss if I don’t tell you. I am sure that you won’t take the word of a “lazy lay on your back do nothing” like myself so I have copied from for your edification.

    – no dictionary results

    Did you mean confiscate
       [kon-fuh-skeyt, kuhn-fis-keyt] Show IPA verb, con·fis·cat·ed, con·fis·cat·ing, adjective

    verb (used with object)
    1. to seize as forfeited to the public domain; appropriate, by way of penalty, for public use.

    2. to seize by or as if by authority; appropriate summarily.

    “Defend your indefensible position. If a little comfiscation is good, why not comfiscate it all and bring on your supposed utopia?”

    Steve; I just don’t know where to start.

    Let’s begin with the simple and then move on to the more complex.

    1. Something that really irks me is when I keep saying “Tan” and you keep telling me I said “Brown”. If what I meant was “Brown”; I damn well know how to say it. Tan Tan Tan Tan. Get it Steve? Fucking Tan.
    I do not now; nor have I ever in the past; suggested that I would support a Communist Government. neither a Soviet nor a Chinese style Communism.
    I do not like communism in my house.
    I will not like it for my spouse.
    I will not like communism on my lawn.
    I will not like it at dusk or dawn.
    I will not like communism; I don’t give a damn.
    What lies you tell of me; Steve I am.

    Get that Steve? Now that was the simple part. On to the more complex.

    Above; you tell me to defend my position. My position is that a little bit of Socialism mixed with our Capitalism; would be a good thing.
    Then you suggest: “If a little comfiscation is good,(my idea), why not comfiscate it all and bring on your supposed utopia?”
    Note that the idea to “Comfiscate” it all came from you; and then you call it “MY supposed utopia”
    (Utopia by the way is a proper noun and therefore should be capitalised) But as I have clearly stated several times and you alluded to when you said “if a little confiscation is good”; a little confiscation was what I suggested. So what you have done in essence is take my idea of a little confiscation; and expand on it to ask me to change it to total confiscation or in-other-words; you have taken my suggestion of adding a little Socialism to our society; and you have expanded on it and nearly begged me to support your more extreme plan of total Communism.

    Next you say: “The Soviet Union proved that years ago.” Proved what Steve? That your idea of total Communism is a good one? I’m so confused.

    Then we hear: “Even China has morphed into a Capitalist/communist society” (I don’t mean to be a pain in the ass Steve but Communist; when used as a label for a society is a proper noun also and therefore should be capitalized; especially when the other half of the label is capitalised as you have done here. No big deal to me Steve but I don’t want you getting any nasty letters from the American Communist Party demanding equal treatment.) Now perhaps I should repeat your last statement.
    “Even China has morphed into a Capitalist/communist society” Is this a popular thing for nations to do now? Are there many other countries spontaneously morphing into Capitalist/Communist societies? I mean “Even China is on the band wagon suggests that they have confirmed your idea that mixing Capitalism with communism is a good plan.
    But Steve; You just got done telling me that what you wanted was total communism. How can you now say that you want a mix.
    Really Steve; I think you better do a little soul searching and figure out just what it is you do want.
    Is it Communism or Capitalism/Communism?

    Well; let me just state for the record that I’m going to stick with my idea of Capitalism/ Socialism Steve. Tan Tan Tan But definitely not Brown Steve.
    I don’t know why you would ever support Brown Steve.
    The Soviet Union proved years ago that Brown (Total Communism) doesn’t work.
    Even the Chinese have found that a system as restrictive as theirs is helped when Capitalism is added into the mix.
    No; I think I’ve got the best idea Steve. You can keep your Communism Steve.

    Do the other Republicans or Libertarians around you know that you think like this Steve?
    I can’t imagine this is part of their Party Platform.

  4. angrymanspeaks

    August 4, 2012 at 01:11

    Please take special care to note that not once in my entire reply immediately above did I call you a name other than Steve; which I can only assume is still acceptable to you. If I have erred; please be sure to let me know and I will refrain from refering to by any monicker at all but will refer to you simply as “You”.
    Thanks for stopping by Steve eh You eh; whatever.

  5. Steve

    August 9, 2012 at 13:01

    I am kind of tickled when anybody puts together a list of statistics to prove a point, especially the left, although the right does it too. My son just completed a course in statistics and a couple of times we came to the conclusion that you make any group of numbers mean just about anything, it’s all in the presentation. For example, your above numbers state that the specified group over 200K income level that doesn’t pay ANY fed income tax grew under Bush. Is it possible that is because at about that income level a person no longer actually “works” but has now invested in a business and pays capital gains instead of Fed Tax? You know much like the BS about Warren Buffets secretary paying a higher percentage of tax than him? He has investment income not wage income. Common sense should tell you that 15% of 500 million dollars is a much larger amount than 28% of 200K. I never quite understood how the left figures the rich don’t pay their “fair share”. Just how much should that be and why should the rich pay a higher percentage than anyone else if we are truly looking to be fair. Seems to me all you lefties want to fair when it suits you. Just because someone has more than you doesn’t give you the right to take his

    PS: you can call me whatever you want, I have pretty thick skin and I am confidant of my way of life and the ability to live by and defend the principles my parents and life experiences have taught me


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


Some political ramblings...and other jumbledness

From Where I Sit

Thoughts from an old Southern guy

The Blog

The latest news on and the WordPress community.

The Undaunted Democrat

Politics Taken seriously

Paul Militaru

Photography Portfolio

The Fifth Column

"News and views from around the world"

Zeebra Designs & Destinations

An Artist's Eyes Never Rest


Issues of politics, race, and everything else.

"Do or Do not. There is no try."

A Little Tour in Yellow

A Premise Salesman with Some Things on His Mind

List of X

This Blog Is Not Recommended By WordPress

World Of Alexander The Great

"Everything is possible to him who will try"

Ask Old Jules

the Hermit in the Hill Country


"in nonsense is strength"

The Sieve of Truth

Sieving the credible from the incredible

As My World Turns

What's New and Has My Attention

Bell Book Candle

Politics and poetry

♥ The Tale Of My Heart ♥

In your light, I learn how to love. In your beauty, how to make poems. You dance inside my chest, where no one sees you.

So Far From Heaven

Too many reincarnations in a single lifetime to trust this one.

Dogpaddling Through Life

Accompanied by Cats With Big Attitudes

%d bloggers like this: