In article ,
"DGDevin" wrote:

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in message
...

Without the Bush tax cuts, we'd have a sluggish economy like now.

Conveniently ignoring that for most of Clinton's time in office the economy
was doing pretty good. Growth averaged 4%, median family income increased
$6,000, unemployment was the lowest in 30 years. How come a smart fella
like you didn't notice any of that?
But the growth was faster in the second half after his tax cut.
Interesting chart, that one. (g).

What about Bush's deficits? The federal debt doubled while he was in
office, most of that time with a Repub Congress, remember? Could it just be
possible that tax cuts at a time of increased spending also produces
deficits? Or is that some kind of tricky liberal doublespeak and you know
better than to believe it even if you can't say why?
Increased spending being the operative variable though. Don't know
if it would still work, but a bunch of studies in the 80s noted that if
we just kept Fed spending increases to the amount of inflation, the
budget would balance itself in 6-10 years (depending on the
assumptions).

--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
---PJ O'Rourke