NYJetsFan.com Forums: The Bush Tax-Cut Failure - NYJetsFan.com Forums

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

Jets win 3-1. Beat dolphins so bad that philbin isnt allowed back from england.
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:37 PM) I would like to see us use a 4 man front on passing downs. With Wilk on the the end Rich on the other end and Williams and Harrison in the middle
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:37 PM) the interior pressure we'll bring is going to be crazy
ganggreen2003 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:37 PM) and if he's in game shape
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:37 PM) Or Use Rich and Williams in the middle and put Wilk and Coples on the Ends
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:38 PM) Richardson won't be suspended this season from that
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:40 PM) This D-line reminds me of the 2011 Giants who used JPP and Tuck on the inside and Osi and Kiwanuka on the ends
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:41 PM) 4 10 sack players at 1 points in their careers and no o-line could stop them all
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:41 PM) I think this D-line will be so much better
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:43 PM) The thing that is scary is that we also have a great secondary
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:44 PM) Exactly
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:44 PM) All of our additions in the secondary look great. Darrelle Revis changes secondaries
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:44 PM) Buster Skrine has been a beast at nickel
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) Take a sack or throw it up
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) Marcus Gilchrist has been making plays in coverage at FS.
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) The Island!!!
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) Never should have let him go
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) We could have just taken Rich at 9
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:46 PM) but o well he is back now
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:46 PM) You got to think Revis has also never had this much talent around him
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:48 PM) all 3 of our wins we pretty much dominated in
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:48 PM) Our defense has allowed the leagues best 13 PPG
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:49 PM) We beat us against Philly
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:50 PM) 4 turnovers and a Punt return TD
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:58 PM) If fitz can be smart with the ball and Marshall Decker and Ivory and stay healthy I think we can beat anyone
santana Icon : (05 October 2015 - 02:36 PM) http://www.sun-senti...1005-story.html
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:16 PM) I get it to a point why everyone is making a big deal about that missed call because difference between a win and a loss but I have never seen that call made in over 30 years of watching NFL so I guarantee that none of the fans , coaches or players new the rule. Yes the refs should know all the rules but they aren't computers and it's impossible for them to remember all the 1000's of rules. Especially an old rule no one but the officials ever heard of before. 22 new officials didn't help either. It took an old long time official now retired from officiating to tell the world the rule. Everyone and the officials will remember that rule from now on after all the media
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:27 PM) Lions fans are b*tching like hell about it. We would be if it happened to us but I think it's a bad rule any way and should be scrapped. If the defense causes the offensive player to fumble in the end zone because the defense makes a good play I personally think it would be bullshit to give the fumbling team the ball back. If the ball went out of bounds on its own or if a player tried to recover it and the ball went out of the end zone it's not a penalty. Both cases are a touchback so I feel that giving the ball back to the offense that fumbled it because of the defense batting the ball out of the end zone if the offense recovered the ball it would be a td so it would be bullshit to give them the ball back because of a simple ball bat. Rule should really be changed
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:30 PM) It's ok for the offense to deliberately take a safety to prevent a TD and only give up 2 points an benefit themselves so yeah I think it is an old out of date rule that should be thrown out. If the d makes a great play they shouldn't have to give the offense the ball back because of a stupid rule
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:30 PM) So I'm glad it wasn't called
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:31 PM) Hope it's changed next year
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:31 PM) it's been called a ton of times, they showed a montage o ESPN last night of a bunch of times it's been called
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:33 PM) just because one player made a great play, doesn't mean you can excuse someone making a bonehead play
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:34 PM) chancellor made a great play (remember when i wanted the jets to draft him?) but the LBer should have not illegally batted it, he could have tried to recover it or body blocked det from recovering.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:34 PM) Not sure what ESPN you had on ESPN China? I left ESPN on for 2 hours after the game and I never seen this montage you say. I'm calling you out as bullshit. Show me a video of proof
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:38 PM) Even the old ESPN official couldn't remember an instance of it being called. It isn't the same as the offense backing out of the end zone with the ball or being sacked in the end zone for a safety. Completely different rule and situation. I've never seen it called and I watch at least 6 games at a time a week. None of the ESPN announcer players, Ray Lewis, Dilfer, or Young even knew the rule and that's over 20 years of NFL experience. Yet none of them knew or understood the rule until it was explained in detail
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:40 PM) I've never once seen the ball given back to to offense so I challenge you to show me this montage you claim was on. If I didn't see it for two hours I after the game I'm calling bullshit on your end
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:43 PM) Say whatever you want but show me proof or just leave it be because I won't believe you without a bunch of video proof. I have a hell of a memory and if it ever was called maybe once or twice in the past 30 years but no way there is some montage
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:48 PM) Nether coach knew the rule either and they would know more of the rules than the players and fans. If not for a retired official bringing it up it probably would've never even been brought up at all
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:58 PM) I highly questionable is on now and they are even saying no one knew the rule or complained until they were told the rule.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 04:05 PM) I have seen plenty of games where defenders did knock the ball out of the end zone like the situation last night to prevent any possible touchdown not disputing that because that has happened a good many times. My point is I've never seen a flag thrown for it and the ball given to the offense. It's definitely an obsolete rule that should be thrown out. The NFL has made the rules so offensive friendly these days it's hard to play defense with out calls anymore. That is just one more bullshit rule to help the offense. Take the Jets Dolphins game for instance. Those bullshit pi calls against our defense for clearly uncatchable balls. Pi never should've never been called giving up like 60 yards on two calls and a td that never would've happened. At most they should've been 5 yard holding calls. Never would've been mad if they just called them holding calls.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 04:06 PM) Anyway I'm tired of all these offense friendly rules these days screwing over the defenses. It's starting to get like non touch flag football for the defenses.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 04:11 PM) You know it too. Our team has been a defensive team for well over a decade and so many bullshit calls have been called against our defense because of the new offensive friendly rules. So I say screw Detroit. I'm glad it wasn't called and a defense gets a break
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 06:37 PM) call em a liar if you want, but I seen it man
santana Icon : (Today, 12:52 AM) guess I should enable a character limit for the shoutbox
santana Icon : (Today, 12:53 AM) getting a bit out of hand
Resize Shouts Area

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

The Bush Tax-Cut Failure Voodoo economics

#1 User is offline   Mr_Jet Icon

  • Assistant Head Coach
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,325
  • Joined: 31-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Earth

  • NFL Team:

Posted 22 May 2013 - 02:36 AM


The Bush Tax-Cut Failure
May 21, 2013
by Bruce Bartlett

This post originally appeared on The New York Times Economix blog.

Posted Image
President Bush touts his tax cut plan to a crowd at Lafayette Regional Airport March 9, 2001, in Lafayette, La. (AP Photo/Kenneth Lambert)

Ten years ago this month, Congress enacted the third major tax cut of the George W. Bush administration. Its centerpiece was a huge cut in the tax rate on dividends. Historically, they had been taxed as ordinary income, but the Bush plan, enacted by a Republican Congress, cut that rate to 15 percent. The tax rate on ordinary income went as high as 35 percent.

This initiative originated with the economist R. Glenn Hubbard, who had been chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers when the proposal was sent to Congress. Mr. Hubbard was a strong believer that the double taxation of corporate profits – first at the corporate level and again when paid out as dividends – was a major economic problem.

During the George H. W. Bush administration, Mr. Hubbard had been deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury for tax policy and wrote a Treasury report advocating full integration of the corporate and individual income taxes.

Mr. Hubbard had also spearheaded enactment of big tax cuts in 2001 and 2002 that he said would jump-start the American economy. In an op-ed article in The Washington Post on Nov. 16, 2001, he predicted that the soon-to-be-enacted 2002 tax cut, which President Bush signed on March 9, 2002, would “quickly deliver a boost to move the economy back toward its long-run growth path.”

Mr. Hubbard predicted that it would create 300,000 additional jobs in 2002 and add half a percentage point to the real gross domestic product growth rate.

There is no evidence that the tax cut had any such effect. The unemployment rate remained above 5.7 percent all year, rising to 5.9 percent in November and 6 percent in December. The real GDP growth rate fell each quarter of 2002, and by the fourth quarter growth was at a standstill. Hence the need for yet another big tax cut.

The idea of the 2003 legislation was to raise dividend payouts, thereby bolstering personal income, and raise the prices of common stock, which would improve household balance sheets. As President Bush explained in his signing statement, “This will encourage more companies to pay dividends, which in itself will not only be good for investors but will be a corporate reform measure.” He also said the dividend tax cut would “increase the wealth effect around America and help our markets.”

The Treasury Department issued a fact sheet on July 30 asserting that the decline in dividends had been a cause of the weak stock market and noting that dividend payouts had risen since enactment of the tax cut on May 28.

Subsequent research, however, found that the increase in dividends was a short-term phenomenon and mainly at companies where stock options were a major form of executive compensation. A 2005 Federal Reserve Board study found that the United States stock market did not outperform European stock markets after the dividend cut. Nor did stocks qualifying for lower dividend taxes outperform those, such as real estate investment trusts, that did not qualify for lower dividend taxes. Non-dividend paying stocks slightly outperformed dividend-paying stocks, and many corporations that did pay higher dividends scaled back stock repurchases by a similar amount.

Share repurchases were a common way that corporations returned profits to shareholders. They raised stock prices, which were untaxed as long as shareholders held the stock and were taxed at low capital gains tax rates when sold.

A 2006 Federal Reserve study found that a third of corporations cut share repurchases by the same amount they increased dividend payouts. Hence only the form of shareholder compensation changed, not the amount. A 2010 Federal Reserve study found little change in total dividend payouts after the 2003 rate cut as a percentage of corporate earnings. It concluded that the tax cut had little, if any, effect.

A 2008 study published in the National Tax Journal surveyed investment professionals to see their reaction to the dividend tax cut. It found that the tax cut was less significant than other factors, such as corporate cash flow and cash holdings that were unaffected by the tax change.

A 2011 study by the Treasury Department examined household portfolios. It found no evidence that households shifted their investments from those whose return was taxed as ordinary income into dividend-paying stocks whose income was taxed less.

Finally, a January 2013 study by Danny Yagan of the University of California, Berkeley, examined the impact of the 2003 tax cut on corporate investment. He found zero change.

It is hard to find even a reputable conservative economist willing to say anything good these days about President Bush’s tax and economic policies. In 2009, the Harvard economist Dale Jorgenson said he saw no redeeming features in them.

In 2011, the economist Alan Viard of the conservative American Enterprise Institute told Bloomberg News, “The effects of the Bush tax cuts on growth were ambiguous at best.” He added, “They were not much of a poster child for pro-growth tax policy.”

Even Mr. Hubbard now seems unwilling to defend the tax cuts he shepherded into law. Earlier this year, he was asked by The New York Times what he thought about the repeal of many of the Bush-era tax cuts on Jan. 1. He said many of those tax cuts were no longer relevant to our tax and economic problems.

Mr. Hubbard even suggested that higher revenues, long a Republican no-no, were not a bad thing. “We need a tax system that can promote economic growth and raise the revenue the American people want to devote to government,” he said.

-Bruce Bartlett held senior policy roles in the Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations and served on the staffs of Representatives Jack Kemp and Ron Paul. He is the author of The Benefit and the Burden: Tax Reform – Why We Need It and What It Will Take. He’s been a guest of Bill’s twice on Moyers & Company.

Papa Bush had it right from the very beginning...

View PostFlyHiJets, on 01 June 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:

You're the scumbag that thinks everyone should kiss the as$es of a bunch of criminals but I'm a dumbass. Yeah okay douchebag. Go give some illegal wetback or Revis another blowjob. But then again.....don't you live in an entirely different country but yet think you can tell us how to live? Go fvck yourself little boy. You're likely still living with mommy & daddy. Pu$$y.

View Postazjetfan, on 02 July 2014 - 03:36 PM, said:

There are a few things I have realized about Mr. Jet over a few topics.

1) He is a racist. By constantly using race as a battling tool.
2) He is an extreme Liberal. If you are on either extreme you are probabaly more wrong than right.
3) He is one of those people who will never admit fault, error or defeat.
4)His life sucks and he takes it out on people who don't share in his views.

#2 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,167
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 22 May 2013 - 05:15 PM

You have to have a reasonable budget for a tax code to work. Something our government has yet to do effectively no matter the party for one reason or another. Some people want more taxes and the government to be more evolved with their lives and some do not. Time to put all this Liberal vs Conservative or Democrate vs Republican crap aside. It's fun to talk about but eventually something will need to be done.
Posted Image

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users