Lindsey Graham Regurgitates the GOP's Tax Cut Whopper
The utter falsity of a statement is no barrier to Republican leaders repeating it. And so it was Sunday, as South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham offered his version of the GOP's Uber Lie that tax cuts pay for themselves.
Appearing on Fox News Sunday, Graham defended the Republicans' demand for another $700 billion windfall for the wealthy by announcing the fiscal equivalent of the sun rising in the west and setting in the east:
"When you look historically, when we raise taxes, the economy slows and we don't get any more revenue. When we cut taxes, the economy grows and we maintain the same amount of revenue."
Not on this planet.
In his version of the Republican myth that "tax cuts pay for themselves," President Bush confidently proclaimed, "You cut taxes and the tax revenues increase." In 2007, Graham's puppet master John McCain explained, "Tax cuts, starting with Kennedy, as we all know, increase revenues." As it turned out, not so much. After Ronald Reagan tripled the national debt with his supply-side tax cuts, George W. Bush doubled it again with his own. And in between, the Clinton years saw robust economic growth, balanced budgets along with higher taxes (which, by the way, every single Republican in the House and Senate voted against.)
In fact, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) found that the Bush tax cuts accounted for almost half of the mushrooming deficits during his tenure. As another CBPP analysis forecast, over the next 10 years, the Bush tax cuts if made permanent will contribute more to the U.S. budget deficit than the Obama stimulus, the TARP program, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and revenue lost to the recession put together. Predictably, the Bush tax cuts didn't come anywhere close to paying for themselves. And as Congressional Budget Office projections revealed in June, making them permanent is the very worst thing the so-called deficit hawks could do to reduce the U.S. debt.
Sadly, Lindsey Graham's fraud is now orthodoxy in Republican circles. Despite the inescapable conclusion of history, theory and empirical evidence to the contrary, Mitch McConnell, Jon Kyl, John Boehner, Tom Coburn, John McCain, Kay Bailey Hutchison and other Republican alchemists continue to insist that cutting taxes increases government revenue and thereby reduces the deficit. Of course, even though the tax cut claim is laughably false, conservative ideology requires that it must true. Otherwise, the Republicans have just been giving money to rich people.
For more background, charts and data, see "10 Epic Failure of the Bush Tax Cuts."
One and one is five.
The argument is just crazytown. How do these slugs say this kind of thing without bustin' up?
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
I bet because the pervert enabled Graham to lie without calling him on his lie.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
that if you repeat nonsense often enough it becomes truthy. And truthy regrettably translates into votes.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
(sorry, duplicate post; see below)
"Whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, the Republicans are not the least bit interested in solving it. They are interested in two things, and two things only: making you afraid of it, and telling you who's to blame for it."
"When you look historically, when we raise taxes, the economy slows and we don't get any more revenue. When we cut taxes, the economy grows and we maintain the same amount of revenue."
When the economy grows, shouldn't there be more revenue? Doesn't the word, "grow" imply larger or more?
you didn't understand economics. Maybe. Maybe not but you certainly have no trouble detecting bullshit. Of course if you raise taxes high enough then it would act as a brake on the economy. The US has not been near those tax rates since before the days of Reagan. What made Ronnie look good was the stimulatory deficit spending and not the reduced taxation rates. If you think any Republican will ever confess to that you are destined to be disappointed.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Any good Republican economist knows that if you quit worrying about adding oil to the crankcase, you'll have way more money for gas and beer.
God, when will people wake up and realize that the Republicans really are trying to bring Nineteen Eighty-Four to life?
"Whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, the Republicans are not the least bit interested in solving it. They are interested in two things, and two things only: making you afraid of it, and telling you who's to blame for it."
When the media is either stopped in its tracks, or "reformed".
[ i know - rhetorical question, but i couldn't help myself]
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
republican that ever tells the truth. Name one that doesn't just regurgitate the same old talking points. Someone please just name one.
Ron Paul. But then he is a real quirky bird, and it's not consistent truth.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
Do they have a rotation for propaganda spouting?
yeah I noticed that too...
he got real quiet for a while after he was "outed"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2MCXjkS8cc&fe...
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
Ron Paul is a libertarian for whatever reason is masquerading as a republican probably because he would never be elected as a libertarian.
Ya, i guess you're absolutely right. So, i guess there are no republicans that don't lie all the time. Even the pundits lie all the time. About everything.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
viewer discretion advised
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mqsx2Y74Ws&NR=1
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
When you cut taxes which portion of the economy grows?
That which is outsourced.
The rest of us are given nickels on the dollars for popular program, wages that don't increase, jobs that are no longer available.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
"It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now ... Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus."
– John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962, president's news conference
_____________________________________________________________
"Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government.
John F. Kennedy, Jan. 17, 1963, annual budget message to the Congress, fiscal year 1964
______________________________________________________________
"In today's economy, fiscal prudence and responsibility call for tax reduction even if it temporarily enlarges the federal deficit – why reducing taxes is the best way open to us to increase revenues."
– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 21, 1963, annual message to the Congress: "The Economic Report Of The President"
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
There is no question that cutting taxes increases GDP. That's actually definitionally true, since increasing government spending or lowering taxes by definition increases GDP. And it's also true that Republicans like to use the same JFK quotes you cite as support for their position.
But the question is whether or not lower taxes increases economic growth enough to offset the loss of tax revenue. The data from the Reagan and Bush years is clear: it did not.
For more, see CBPP on Tax Cut Myths and Realities.
But doesn't the economy have to be already growing?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
...all about the Kennedy tax cuts, and how they differ from any GOP backed tax cuts since, say, 1981.
Not vague quotes in a vacuum, either. Compare, contrast, and tell me why they might effect the economy differently.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
I'm pretty sure that Kennedy got "whacked" before any of his proposed tax cuts were implemented.
so I can't help you there.
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
Nice rebuttal. Devastating
woodguy
Kennedy was only in for 1000 days, so he's thinking--"pretty sure," that is--JFK just sat around 3 years, waiting for the magic bullet.
me-oww!
After he died. With no help from Republicans or Dixiecrats.
You should do some more reading. Then, instead of crapping it right back out, think about it- in your case, think about it for a long, long, long, long, long, long, long time. Then think about it for a long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long time again. Then take a long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long time typing it up. Then take a long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long time reading what you wrote. Then, if you haven't died of old age, hit 'Save'. Then expect that someone at Crooks&Liars 2050 will find at least half of what you wrote ridiculous.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
In Ike's and Kennedy's day were at a maximum of 91%, as I'm sure you're aware. I could just as easily have pulled out a Kennedy quote saying we should strive relentlessly to beat the USSR to the moon--it would be as relevant. That's the problem with the teabaggers, they just mouth platitudes and are unable to think clearly, let alone critically.
woodguy
he fails to mention is that Kennedy's tax cut included a closing of loopholes where the richest weren't paying taxes on their total income anyway. That and the times in history are the main reasons it was successful. Now the richest use offshore accounts to hide their income.
I would love to see Warren Buffet pay more taxes than he already does.
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
how Warren Buffet falls into the catagory of what you have been trying to prove your point with.
Seeing that your Tea Party idols- and I'm talking about the pre-2009 co-opters, people with names like, uhm, Ron Paul- don't think anyone should pay any federal income tax.
You do realize that the whole Tea Party meme is based on some half-baked theory that the Founding Fathers fought the Revolutionary War in order to put an end to taxation, right? Eugene Debs didn't hold Tea Parties to protest US involvement in World War I.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
Just a year or so ago soggy bread was arguing that that income tax was unconstitutional like he never heard of the XVI Amendment, as per Article V.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
When the annual deficit was a whopping 7.1 billion dollars. (Billions, isn't that quaint) and the top marginal tax rate was 91 per cent. It isn't true now.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
If tax cuts always pay for themselves, why not eliminate taxes completely? After all, this tax cut would pay for itself... right? (When Kennedy said that, the highest tax bracket was around 90%. If someone said "we need more water" during a drought - would you claim the same solution would apply during a flood?)
We really need to add more tax brackets and increase the marginal rates. Rough numbers: add new brackets at $2mm, $3mm... up to $10+ million in combined income, and take the maximum rate to around 50% at the $10 million annual income mark. Oh, and close the hedge fund manager "it's not income, it's long term capital gains" scam.
Too bad we're getting government by the "golden rule": them as has the gold are buying the congresscritters and making the rules.
Things are very different now.
Bush tax cuts didn't help the economy because they were already very low. lowering them only helps when they are too high to begin with.
Personal income tax rates are very low at this time.
The tax rates were about 90% back in 1962.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
...the plain truth is that America is so damn broke (10 times over)
that if we were to take Buffet, Gates, Soros and Murdoch...
...and clone each one of them... (and their money 20 times over) ...and tax them at 100%
It still wouldn't do anything to bring back the jobs that have disappeared overseas.
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
That is sad, but we are talking about republican lies about income tax here.
Understand Wildeyes' next comment that explains the Laffer Curve which correlates taxes and revenue.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
Supply-side economics is based around the Laffer Curve which correlates taxes and revenue. The Republicans would have you believe that you can cut taxes endlessly without negatively affecting revenue but that is patently false even in the context of their own economic model. The Laffer Curve is a classic bell curve with a tax rate that maximizes revenue and diminishing returns on both sides of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve
I don't subscribe to trickle-down economics and only bring this up to show that quoting someone from 50 years ago when the economic conditions were quite different doesn't really prove anything even if true at the time. Cutting taxes during a recession when the problem is one of demand and not supply for the people who therefore have the least incentive to spend it is not going to increase government revenue/reduce the deficit or create any jobs.
...from one of the most beloved... (by me) ...Democratic presidents in history.
"The largest single barrier to full employment of our manpower and resources and to a higher rate of economic growth is the unrealistically heavy drag of federal income taxes on private purchasing power, initiative and incentive."
– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, special message to Congress on tax reduction and reform
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
Define unrealistic.
Kennedy's was 70% (down from Eisenhower's 90%)
Top tax rate 2010 35%
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
If anything we'd have to RAISE top tax rate 35% to equal Kennedy's.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
...and right now they are bitching about a tax hike of a few percent. If they are looking to be hated and disrespected by all, including the rich, they are certainly on the right path. I really hope we are just about done with the republican party.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
Things are not even close to the way they were in 1963.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
.
woodguy
.
woodguy
It's embarrassing watching you humiliate yourself. Just stop already.
What is your conceptual, continuity?
Make the tax cuts permanent and the "revenue shortfalls" cease to exist. BECAUSE... your revenue projections change. THAT'S how they feed their lie, by changing/lowering the expectations.
Amazing what liars can do with the stroke of a pen
http://thegreatendarkenment.blogspot.com/
About lowering taxes to make more money.
It doesn't apply to the here and now.
1st of all, the airhead here is citing quotes from a time period just after Eisenhower.
When taxes were high. I don't want to get into what Ike did with those taxes. Highway system across this country, and a lot more.
I don't want to get in to that in 1963 a stamp cost a nickle. Gas was just 30 cents a gallon.
I don't want to get into that the population in 1963 was 189,241,798. Today we're over 300,000,000.
While shit for brains is trying to draw some kind of conclusion by quoting JFK, he's failing( again) to recognize that that was then and this is now. Two totally different worlds. No comparison. I forget what the tax rate was when Ike was President. But it was very high. What numbnuts up there is forgetting is that taxes have already been cut to the bare minimum. What needs to happen is an increase. The wealthy have to pay more. If we have too as well, then so be it. There is no other option. Unless you want to see even more poverty and chaos.
What is your conceptual, continuity?
Another day another blatant lie , so what else is new ?
Insanity , it is what it is , there is no understanding it .
Milks toasty bits should be pretty embarrassed. He honestly can't see the difference. wow. amazing.
What is your conceptual, continuity?
who understands economics.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Gold bug? No. Crucify him on a cross of gold- he's a silver man!
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
Historically, he will have been against homosexuality until he gets caught with a luggage boy's cock in his mouth.
Vote GOP and move forward to the 18th Century.
...all I did was quote Kennedy!!!
just so everyone knows...I'm a big fan of increasing taxes on the rich. (anyone who makes over 100 thou a year)
however govt needs to leave us little guys alone.
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
Those Kennedy cuts lowered the top marginal rates from 91% to 71% (that is, they got taxes lowered 20% , but a 22% tax cut), but a lot of loopholes were closed.
Okay, seems like the Bush tax cuts, right?
Wrong. Because what got it was that really got the economy cooking was that the lowest margin was dropped from 20% to 14%- only a drop of 6%, but a cut of 30%!
And that very, very large group of people at the bottom actually spend their money, creating more business, creating more jobs, because they're buying that new car, or that new tv, putting some of their cuts into savings....While those few in the upper margins can only buy so much stuff. So those in the lower margin create a demand for goods and services in greater proportion relative to their tax cuts, while those in the upper margins create a much, much lower demand in proportion to their cuts.
This is known as demand-side economics. It's quite the opposite of GOP supply-side, trickle-down economics, which pretends that when the top marginal payers get higher tax cuts, they use it to build. So since Reagan, supply-siders have been pushing for bigger cuts in the top margins, and the slightest cuts to those in the lower margins. But why build if there's no one to buy? So instead of building, they just horde the wealth as the economy stagnates.
So, you see, you didn't simply quote Kennedy. You attempted to equate Kennedy with the modern GOP, and in your attempt to equate a liberal icon with the absolute scum of the Earth, in an attempt to try to paint Democrats as hypocrites, you succeeded only in making yourself look like a bigger fool than you do usually- no small feat, that.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
in the same way but I hate arguing with a fool. No small feat? Easier than hell for him.
Mostly he jumps one great white shark after another, which is boring- and foolish- enough.
But this time he jumped a bluegill and tried to say he jumped a great white. Had he made the claim with tongue planted firmly in cheek, then it might even be entertaining, but he had the audacity to do so without irony and got called on it.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
...demonstrate where Graham was coming from.
...and never in my 4 years of commenting here have I EVER advocated lowering taxes on the rich.
Kennedy's quotes were necessary to provide a little context to the debate...
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
No, it was to give youself false credentials
Or should I say faux...?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
bullshit. You were trying to say even JFK was for lower taxes. You were trying to look smart, but, you had the exact opposite happen. Or should I say, You wanted to look smart only to reveal(even more so than usual) that you're not.
Your bullshit has gotten so tired . It's old. As you can see, you're pissing off more and more people every week with your lame ass attempts at.......I don't know what to call it.
Irony? Sarcasm? Intelligence? Did you really think that people here weren't going to be able to see what you were trying to do?
It's old.
What is your conceptual, continuity?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIpqLb72wsg
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Graham is a fool
These fuck wad republicans are denying the unemployed their $275 weekly benefit while falling over themselves to give the rich millions in unneeded tax cuts which BTW destroyed are economy
Is a real piece of work, ain't he? Get him the fuck off the air!!!!!
Is it the 21st century yet?
???
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
Lindsey Graham can suck my c#ck.
far left loon >.<
Chick?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Comments are closed on this entry