Tea Party math and Clinton policies

On 8/20/2010 10:01 PM, Ilya Shambat wrote:
> This is my full response to the people in the Tea Party movement who
> are agitating for more tax cuts or claim that tax cuts have always
> resulted in prosperity.
>
> When Clinton raised taxes on higher incomes in a serious effort to
> tackle the deficit, that increased investor confidence in American
> economy, which helped create the 90s boom. As deficit declined, the

UUUUuuummmmmm…. the tax hike was early and the boom was much later
after Democrats lost the midterm elections and their lost their numbers
in the House of Representatives and Newt began running the House. Do you
remember the *Contract with America* and after that they pushed through
some of the Contract and *CUT_WELFARE, along with other cuts to the
Budget. The cuts to government growth were enough to spur growth while
the tax hike wasn’t enough to stall the growth and force people to look
forward to a sinking economy.

I’d say the effort to BALANCE the budget did more than any tax. But that
tax early on also helped to balance the budget although cutting
government was what triggered the growth, and the tax was shutting down
the economy. You need to push the growth more than you push the
detrimental taxes.

We would have done as well “only it would take longer with only cuts”
but the tax didn’t start the economic growth. Raising taxes on a rising
economy is like buying a stock on it’s climb to the top, you are more
likely to see success….. it takes a lot to crush the momentum. SO
the tax was of little stimulus concern until the economy was kick
started by cutting government, and if you do *NOT* cut government to
kick starts the economy people start looking for a way to get their
returns back up. That means money/Jobs and commerce leaving for greener
pastures.