Started on July 15th, will add as I go on. But post on!! This was clipped from the Wall Street Opinion Journal:
"Friday, July 15, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT
Let's see if we can get this straight: When tax revenues fall and budget deficits go up, it's bad news. But when tax revenues rise and deficits decline, it's still bad news.
At least that seems to be the way a sizable chunk of Washington is reacting to this week's report from the White House budget office that the federal deficit is down by nearly $100 billion this fiscal year, that the deficit as a share of GDP is down to 2.7% (very near its historical average), and that this is all happening because tax receipts are surging by more than 14%. Uncle Sam is having a better year so far than even Paris Hilton, but half of the Beltway is depressed. John Spratt, the ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee, seems especially upset that this revenue surge isn't coming from wage income, but rather from investment income--that is, the so-called non-withholding income tax collections, which have skyrocketed by some 30% this year. "These are typically taxes paid on one-time capital gains, bonuses, stock-options income that may not recur," he laments.
Well, sure, Congressman, the 2003 reductions in the tax rates on dividends and capital gains seem to be resulting in much higher tax revenues on . . . dividends and capital gains. This is called the Laffer Curve effect, and we thank Mr. Spratt for validating it. If he wants those revenues to "recur," maybe he'll even vote to make those tax cuts permanent...."
History has shown this to always be the case. Reduce taxes, and our coffers expand. Why are the liberals so threatened by this proven theory? Because they want control. They want to control your pocket book, while still pretending to be your advocate and buddy buddy. In reality, they are only increasing their own power (Personal power is relinquished when we agree to pay extra taxes, increased regulations etc.) so we can become the nanny state where they take care of everything, and they remain in power. It is so clear and transparent, but too many are looking through their hippy lenses of the 60's that color things to appear utopian in their eyes. The thinking then goes into "Well if my government will do it for me, why should I try?".
Now our coffers are expanding, deficits are being reduced, but they are still complaining.
WHAAA WHAAA WHAA!!!
The article goes on:
This revenue surge from investment income also rebuts the mantra that the 2003 tax cuts were a giveaway to the rich. Nearly half of all Americans have some kind of stock ownership, and thus have shared in these gains in investment income. And if most of the extra tax income is coming from capital gains and dividend payments, that would have to mean that the rich in America are paying more taxes, not less, as a result of the 2003 tax cut.
By the way, we don't recall Mr. Spratt and other Democrats lamenting when a similar spike in taxes from investment income was boosting tax revenues to historic heights as a share of GDP during the dot-com bubble of the late 1990s, as per the nearby chart. Then it was all said to be an economic miracle; now it's a windfall for the wealthy. This selective budget criticism couldn't be related to who's sitting in the White House, could it?