The Lowdown on Trickle-Down
Posted on Sep 11, 2010
Not like the truth will make a difference for the folks who watch Fox News, but the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has analyzed the short-term effects of extending George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the rich and concluded that doing so would be the least effective way to cut unemployment and spur the economy.
The CBO argues that the plan President Obama has now embraced—allowing small businesses to write off 100 percent of their investment costs—is better than the trickle-down policy, but not by much.
A sure-fire way to boost the economy would be direct payments to the jobless and Social Security recipients and/or cutting payroll taxes. Problem is, that plan carries the dreaded “stimulus” label, which these days sends politicians running for cover. —JCL
The New York Times:
With Congressional midterm elections looming, the financial debate in Washington this fall will probably be consumed by one incendiary and expensive issue: whether, and how, to extend the multitrillion-dollar Bush tax cuts.
President Obama is advocating a mixed bag of tax proposals. He wants to extend the cuts for all but the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans and offer businesses hundreds of billions in breaks and write-offs intended to encourage investment and hiring.
Republicans, and a few Democrats, assert that the Bush tax cuts should be extended for everyone, warning that a tax increase right now, even if limited to the highest income bracket, would hurt small businesses and choke off an economic recovery that is already gasping.
AP / Pablo Martinez Monsivais
The Bush budgets were good to the rich while running the national deficit through the roof, even before the economic meltdown.