Happened to have saved an analysis from 2004, and found it while cleaning out my PC of old files. One point we seem to forget to hammer is that the Bush tax cuts reduced income to the US by $4 trillion (if they run through 2014 - we're almost there). So, with a total debt of $16 trillion, the Bush tax cuts will comprise 25% of the total US debt. Again, that's 25% of the total US debt. The article came from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, dated April 23, 2004, here is an excerpt:
The Long-Term Costs
If the tax cuts the Administration wants to make permanent are made permanent, current relief from the swelling Alternative Minimum Tax is continued, as most observers expect it will be (the Administration supports continuation of AMT relief but has not yet put forward a specific AMT proposal), and the additional tax cuts the Administration has proposed are enacted, the future costs of these tax cuts will be extremely large.
■Over the 10-year period from 2005 through 2014, the direct costs of the enacted and proposed tax cuts would total $2.8 trillion. The cost would equal 2.1 percent of the economy in 2014.
■From 2005 through 2014, the increased interest payments on the debt that result from the tax cuts would amount to $1.1 trillion. The interest payments would grow steadily with each passing year and in 2014 would equal $218 billion — or 1.2 percent of the economy. This amount alone is as large a share of the economy as the government now spends on all programs and activities under the Departments of Education, Homeland Security, Interior, Justice, and State combined.
■Considering both the direct costs of the tax cuts and the associated increase in interest payments, the tax cuts would increase deficits by nearly $4 trillion between 2005 and 2014.
■Over the next 75 years, the cost of these tax cuts — assuming they are made permanent — would be more than the combined shortfall in the Social Security and Medicare Hospital Insurance trust funds.
In the absence of the tax cuts, the deficit picture over the coming decade would look very different. Without the tax cuts, the deficit would be under $100 billion in most years. With the tax cuts, the deficit is projected to grow to more than $675 billion by the end of the decade.[2] If the tax cuts are extended, revenues over this period will remain at quite low levels by recent historical standards. Over the next decade, average revenues as a share of GDP would be lower than the average levels of revenues in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.
If you all recall, the rationale for giving these tax cuts was provided by none other than the President, George W Bush who told us the job creators would let the money "trickle down" to what Mitt Romney and the little woman call "you people". As most people are aware, private sector jobs from 2001 to 2008 actually declined - if Bill Clinton were here he would say, in plain English, he ended up with less people working than he started out with.
So, it's important to keep reminding those who are all on board with ex Governor Romney's plan to lower taxes because that will be what causes the economy to grow and create jobs that we've heard that exact speech before, and it produced two things - more money for the wealthiest Americans and an increase in the debt of $4 trillion dollars. Mitt and the rest of the wealthy will have their administrative aids send 'you people" a thank you note.
