Spin this--tax revenues are up substantially, 10% greater in 2006 than 2005, and 2005 tax revenues were substantially higher than 2004 tax revenues.

How can tax revenues be expanding when tax rates were reduced? The same way they do each and every time tax rates are reduced--the economy expands. JFK was a supply sider, as was Ronald Reagan and as is W.

__________________
"Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival."
Winston Churchill

Oh, the supply of money increased 10% from 2005 to 2006, all the while inflation remained flat, huh? Yeah, right.

__________________
"Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival."
Winston Churchill

There is nothing wrong with tax cuts, I just wish they had made tax cuts for the poor and the middle class; not just the wealthy.

You're confusing spending with the rate of spending. If I was making $100 a year but spending $110 a year, I am running a $10 deficit. The next year, if I increase spending by 5% but my revenue increases 10%, I'm still have a deficit, it's just smaller (making $110 a year but spending $115.5 a year for a deficit of $5.5).

You haven't convinced me though that the defecit is smaller. If he is excluding many things then this is just a case of manipulation and is dishonest. Futhermore President Bush inherited a surplus, and then he and congress went crazy and have racked up mor debt than any other president in the history of the united states. ALso the money supply has increased more under this president than any other in the history of America.

SO claiming that revenues have increased and not accounting for the huge increase in the money supply leads you to a false anaysis.

It has gotten so bad they discontinued reportin M3.

Supply siders do not deficit spend. Reagan and W are big time deficit spenders. (W more so than Reagan)
You can just as easily attribute the tax gains to deficit spending as you can tax cuts.
Oh btw, since you have no clue what your talking about. Bush's own hand picked supply side economist, using biased numbers and dynamic modeling proved, that supply side economics are not working for Bush.

How about them apples?

Ixtellor

I haven't tried to convince you of anything with regard to spending. I was pointing out that regardless of spending, we have huge tax revenues coming in.

[quote="Silkheat";p="297542"]SO claiming that revenues have increased and not accounting for the huge increase in the money supply leads you to a false anaysis.[quote="Silkheat";p="297542"]
Why? Do you have any reasons or are you just throwing out words?

Sums it up perfectly.

There is nothing wrong with tax cuts, I just wish they had made tax cuts for the poor and the middle class; not just the wealthy.

The poor don't pay federal income taxes. The middle class did receive a reduction in their tax rates, and the top 10% of wage earners still pay around 90% of all federal income taxes.

__________________
"Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival."
Winston Churchill

Supply siders do not deficit spend. Reagan and W are big time deficit spenders. (W more so than Reagan)
You can just as easily attribute the tax gains to deficit spending as you can tax cuts.
Oh btw, since you have no clue what your talking about. Bush's own hand picked supply side economist, using biased numbers and dynamic modeling proved, that supply side economics are not working for Bush.

How about them apples?

I think you need to check your meds. Federal tax revenues are up 10% in 2006 over 2005. I also must have missed the memo granting the executive branch the authority to spend federal dollars. I was taught that authority resided exclusively with Congress.

__________________
"Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival."
Winston Churchill