Tax Cut Fraud


Pages: 1 2

History never fails to repeat itself, especially when scheming leftists get an upper hand.

We’re in a money panic today. So, President Obama advances what he pictures as a fair deal to chip away at our mountain of debt: We cut some spending, but we raise taxes as part of the deal. It’s only fair. Or so it seems to those with no memory.

Back in 1990, Washington also was in a money panic. Foreign creditors would own America within a decade, politicians fretted. As is happening today, back then the mainstream media were calling for tax hikes as part of any financial agreement, as they are today on reducing the $14.3 trillion debt or on raising the debt limit.

At that time (1990), President George H. W. Bush was promised by the Democrats $2 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases.

Senior Bush had promised his party: “Read my lips. No new taxes.” But Bush caved. The financial outlook seemed to justify it. And he mistakenly thought his opponents could be trusted on their side of the agreement.

You remember what happened: Not only did the $274 billion promised spending cuts never materialize, but also all the $137 billion in tax hikes slid through the Congress. The top marginal rate went from 28 percent to 31 percent.

Baseline spending was $22 billion higher than what the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected it would be before the fraudulent deal was struck. This led ever so easily to another tax increase in 1993 when Bill Clinton came to Office—up to 39.6 percent.

Even Ronald Reagan got taken for a ride. A Politico sifting of Reagan documents found the grand old man signed deficit-reduction in the 1980s that melded annual tax hikes with spending cuts, stunningly similar to what trickster Obama is now asking of Congress.

The most notorious was the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (FEFRA). It was a course change that followed Reagan’s signature income tax cuts in 1981. But in the six years afterward, four more deficit reductions tax acts were passed.

Pages: 1 2

  • Rifleman

    Yep, that's why you know they're full of it unless they cut spending up front. It's like Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown to kick.

    • sky

      bigbadbank.com

      • sky

        thebigbadbank.com all articals

        • Rifleman

          Looks like bs to me.

  • davarino

    Everyone is being taxed enough, except for those in the bottom half with no skin in the game. Why cant we just try cutting spending only? Its never been done. Try something different. Come on, try it, you'll like it.

    • scum

      Get ready for the revolution

      • Rifleman

        What revolution?

      • coyote3

        What are they gonna do, burn their food stamps in protest? Bravo Sierra, if we are going to have an income tax let everyone, I mean everyone, pay, "something". I'll even settle for people paying nothing, if they don't get refund more than is withheld, which is often the case now. Better yet, do away with the constitutionally questionable income tax altogether. Replace it with a national sales/consumption tax, on the condition that the rate be set by constitutional amendment.

        • Rifleman

          "rate be set by constitutional amendment." -GREAT idea, I'm adopting that one.

        • pnndottv

          Everyone pays payroll taxes. I guess Glenn Beck forgot to tell you that one. Idiots calling for lower taxes are incapable of logical decision making. We are at record low tax rates. If we are going to have all of the big guns that you nut jobs want, it takes taxes.

  • scum

    So your plan is to tax the poor and middle class. That works wonders…

    • tanstaafl

      Why not? It would be shared sacrifice. And you know that Obama just has to raise taxes. Why not on those who don't pay any in the first place?

  • Brian

    Tax the rich and big business again. What country did they move to last time this happened?

    • Rifleman

      "The rich and big business" are taxed too much already. Quit being greedy for other people's money.

    • coyote3

      Well, the poor can't move, so why "not" tax them?

  • StephenD

    Consumer tax is the only equitable answer. Businesses that go overseas would come back. Hell, foreign businesses would be clamoring to open up shop here! Elimination of the income tax would work miracles. No more IRS as we know it and a hell of a lot more money flowing into the Federal coffers. No more “loop holes” or “working under the table” EVERYONE that buys ANYTHING would pay a tax, period. You want a pair of work boots? Pay the tax. You want a Rolls Royce? Pay the tax. You buy overseas and bring it into this country…pay the tax. Simple really.

    • guest

      agreed. wrote my thesis many years ago with the same argument. too many deadbeats to ever allow, however.

    • coyote3

      I will say, you consumer tax does have some merit. I could care less how equitable or inequitable it is. Now, I am not so sure I support it 100%, but I will say, it is one type of tax that would probably be constitutional, which is more than I can for the current system. Now, the next step is to make sure the tax money, regardless of how it is collected is spent to exercise powers that are actually constitutionally delegated to congress.