‘C’ student, Mitch McConnell.
“There’s no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue. They increased revenue because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy. So I think what Senator Kyl was expressing was the view of virtually every Republican on that subject.”
“…it’s hard to see the country prospering when one of its two major political parties is this economically illiterate. McConnell isn’t some backbencher. He’s Senate minority leader. And he thinks there’s “no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue.”
“Economically illiterate”? Those are harsh words, Professor Klein. Do you have anything besides your biased liberal opinions to back up those words?
A Congressional Budgest Office (CBO) estimate, you say? Quote me the relevant section of the report please.
“The new CBO data show that changes in law enacted since January 2001 increased the deficit by $539 billion in 2005. In the absence of such legislation, the nation would have a surplus this year. Tax cuts account for almost half — 48 percent — of this $539 billion in increased costs.”
Ok, not bad but I need more. What else you got, Professor?
“How about the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget? Their budget calculator shows that the tax cuts will cost $3.28 trillion between 2011 and 2018. How about George W. Bush’s CEA chair, Greg Mankiw, who used the term “charlatans and cranks” for people who believed that “broad-based income tax cuts would have such large supply-side effects that the tax cuts would raise tax revenue.” He continued: “I did not find such a claim credible, based on the available evidence. I never have, and I still don’t.” ”
“Mark Zandi, an adviser to John McCain’s presidential campaign, estimated (pdf) that a dollar spent extending the Bush tax cuts would generate .32 cents of taxable economic activity, while a dollar spent on unemployment benefits would generate $1.61 of taxable economic activity.”
“In other words, using the theory under which tax cuts pay for themselves, unemployment benefits are a lot likelier to pay for themselves.”
That’s quite a case you make, Professor. The use of conservative economists to back up your statement as well as the 2005 (Bush years) CBO estimate was quite masterful. It does appear that Senator McConnell and his gang of “charlatans and cranks” (a quote from Bush’s own guy…nice move) have little desire to be economically literate or, for that matter, honest. The documents you cite are all readily available to anyone caring to know the facts.
It almost makes one think that Republicans might have an ulterior motive behind their lies and deception. A foolish thought I’m sure for I cannot imagine an American politician (or party) being so callously insensitive as to deprive millions of their fellow citizens of benefits which would not only help the individuals and their families survive at a time of depression but in fact help grow the economy of the country as a whole.
No one could be that cold-blooded and ignorant…could they?
To receive new posts directly on your Facebook page, become a member of MarioPiperniDotCom’s page. Click here