When will they stop being the “Bush tax cuts”?

| July 10, 2012

The president has recently called for extending the “Bush Tax Cuts” for lower income Americans – you know, when President Bush cut the Clinton tax hikes back and probably saved the post-9-11 economy. The last of the cuts was more than nine years ago. So, I’m wondering when the president and the media are going to call them the “impending Obama tax hikes” and move past the “Bush tax cuts” phrase. From CNN:

President Barack Obama revitalized his push for holding down middle-class tax rates Monday, calling on Congress to pass a one-year extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for people earning less than $250,000 a year.

In a White House statement delivered while people described as working Americans stood behind him, Obama said his proposal would provide the certainty of no tax increase next year for 98% of Americans.

Noting that Republicans seek to maintain all of the Bush tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003, Obama said both sides therefore agree on extending the lower rates for middle-class families.

Of course, the one-year extension is nothing more than a campaign ploy, and not preventing the Obama tax hikes on wealthier Americans is just class warfare at it’s essence. We’re supposed to hate on Republicans because they’ll be holding up stopping the imposition of the Obama Tax Hikes on us because of their support for continued lower tax benefits for Americans making over $250k.

But we didn’t call Bush rollback of the tax burden imposed on us by the previous administration the “Clinton Tax Hikes” so why are we still calling them the “Bush Tax Cuts”? Of course, the answer is that the media and the Democrats for so long told us that they were tax cuts for the rich, even though the current debate proves that lie is just that, since we’re all looking at higher taxes without the benevolence of this president and the Congress.

A one-year extension won’t help the economy in the long term, though. They need to stop holding the economy and voters hostage and make current tax rates permanent.

Category: 2012 election, Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Taxes

Comments (12)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Hondo says:

    Such tax increases are also often counterproductive and actually end up costing jurisdictions which raise taxes revenue. Maryland found that out between 2007 and 2010.

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/48120446

    Alternatively, those with enough $$$$ often vote with their feet taking their $$$$ with them to another country altogether. For an example, see Rich, Denise – plus 459 others during Jan-Mar 2012. Many did this for tax purposes alone.

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/09/460-people-renounced-their-us-citizenship-in-first-quarter-year

  2. NHSparky says:

    They still call them that because that is their last best tenuous grasp at hanging all the economic woes of the last three-plus years on the Bush administration.

    Obama inheritied a shitty economy, no doubt about it. But the fact that it’s STAYED shitty for so long is totally on the Democrats who helped put us there (Fannie and Freddie are basically sound–remember that laffer?) and are keeping us there because let’s face it–who the fuck wants to hire knowing what’s just around the corner? Who wants to give existing employees any increase in benefits knowing they’re going to get a shitload more expensive (or have already?)

    And increasing taxes like Obama wants to do is going to hurt EVERYONE regardless of income level. Way to go, Barry–you got a talking point, but that’s about all you have besides a bunch of class warfare rhetoric and failed economic policy.

    Oh, and before the usual liberal trolls swoop and poop in here telling us he’s been a foreign policy genius, uh, no. Not so much.

  3. BK says:

    In fairness, then, perhaps we need to call them the Reagan-era tax cuts, since Clinton was undoing those…

  4. SFC Holland says:

    Sparky, did you mean to type foreign apology genius? Cause it looked that way to me.

  5. AndyN says:

    I’m really not sure why they’re always going on and on about the Bush tax cuts, if raising the top marginal rate from 35% to 39.6% is the solution to our economic woes, think of how much better off the country would be if we repealed the Kennedy tax cuts and raised the top rate back to 91% where it belongs.

    By the way, Mr. Lilyea, it’s easier for the media to get away with this crap if they can get even the opponents of this madness to accept the debate on Obama’s terms. “…Americans making over $250k” is a lie. That’s the cutoff for an American couple, not for an American. Conceding that Obama is being honest on that point is the skinny edge of the wedge.

  6. OWB says:

    Taxation reform really is not as difficult as whoever out there wishes for us to see it.

    Does it make sense to anyone to only raise the tax rate for lower income folks? No?? Then it makes no more sense to raise rates on anyone else.

    Meanwhile, continuing to argue the same crap over and over again accomplishes nothing except to delay the actual solutions to our economic woes. But that is precisely what career pols want, so we give it to them?

  7. NHSparky says:

    And Andy, I’ve had pretty good years when married where our income was in excess of $200K. I would never consider myself “rich” by any measure.

    Doubly so when you consider the average home in Orange County, CA at the time was in excess of $700K. $200K is barely middle class when the cost of living is that high. Ask someone living on Long Island, or in DC, Boston, LA, Seattle, or NYC if they feel “rich” making $150-200K (sans children.)

  8. Joe says:

    “When will they stop being the ‘Bush tax cuts'”? Never.

  9. NHSparky says:

    So why do they call it extending them? They’ve been in place for a decade now. Bush has been out of office for 3 1/2 years.

    Why can’t they call them the Obama “Soak the Rick” Tax Hikes?

  10. Bonez says:

    I notice that they’re now referring to them as “the Bush-ERA tax cuts …” That’s an evolution from “Bush tax cuts,” which was itself an evolution from the good old original “Bush tax cuts FOR THE RICH.”

  11. Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

    They’ll stop being Bush Tax Cuts when the economy picks up then it will Obama Tax Relief Strategies….

    Same as the reason why Obama has done nothing, it’s Bush’s fault for leaving a mess….

    Same as how Clinton had a surplus that Bush ruined….funny thing about that surplus, when you look at the treasury department’s own website every year that Clinton was in office the deficit increased….when you earn 50,000 against against 47,000 in cost it’s a surplus, until you spend 5,000 more then it’s still a 2,000 deficit….unless you’re Clinton then it’s still a surplus….

    Same as how there is a “social security trust fund”….I’m hoping no one here believes there is any actual money in that trust fund…

    BS is BS is BS….

  12. Devtun says:

    The disease of “more” can’t be cured. Tax the wealthy at the Eisenhower era of > 90% and it won’t make much meaningful difference – gov’t spending is so voracious it burns money faster than AF1 goes thru jet fuel. Spending far exceeds tax revenues so we’re printing money mmm…I mean borrowing with no end in sight – until creditor countries demand higher interest rates. When that happens we are in a serious pickle – tax revenues will be diverted to pay interest on debt and whats left over to keep gov’t running. One day no one will be safe from the Taxman – no matter how poor. The days of “Bush tax cuts” will seem like Shangri La.