Posted on 11/25/2006 11:04:56 PM PST by Zakeet
During the recent off-year elections, the president repeatedly pointed to the booming economy and noted that his tax cuts were responsible. With growth strong and unemployment low despite the ending of the stock-market bubble, terrorist attacks and the war in Iraq, he had every reason to be proud. Moreover, both economic theory and the actual timing of the economic revival support his claims regarding the tax cuts.
That is why it is so odd that rumors swarm around Washington that the president may be willing to raise taxes as part of a "deal" on entitlement reform. In particular, the rumors suggest the president might be willing to get rid of the provision that caps the income level used to compute Social Security taxes and benefits. These rumors aren't without substance; last year the president would not rule out raising the cap when asked.
Doing so would raise the marginal tax rate on the entrepreneurs that Mr. Bush credits for having led the economic recovery by more than 10 percentage points. The new effective rate would be five percentage points above the level when he took office. Moreover, in 2011, the rate would go up a further 4.3 percentage points to an effective 53% marginal rate on entrepreneurial income. The president would thus be not just raising taxes on entrepreneurs to well above the levels that prevailed in the Clinton administration, but to a rate higher than that which prevailed in the Carter administration. Most of the improved incentives for entrepreneurship and work brought about under Reagan would be repealed.
Should the president do this, he doubtless would be thinking that saving Social Security would be worth the price. He would be wrong.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
" didn't "bring up" these statements....I'm just responding with my thoughts if it turns out to be true. While I certainly hope it isn't true, it isn't that hard to believe as a possibility considering how things have been going lately. Not long ago it was "unacceptable" for North Korea to obtain nukes. The same was said of Iran. It has since been accepted. All those words are meaningless now."
Well said.
Let me make it clear for you, I thought we were discussing this RUMOR! I think a healthy discussion about what the MSM prints is always good. Most of what they print is RUMOR!
I think most posters here realize this is a "reported RUMOR" and not fact!
Clinton better than Bush? What about the sellouts to the Chinese? What about Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court? What about the non-response to terrorism?
I agree.
Half of Bush's legacy rests on cutting taxes. He is not about to undo that at this point.
Maybe but I'll tell y'all what would be the death knell of the party, is if W caves on Iraq.
I certainly hope that all these rumors are not really "trial balloons" to see what the reactions are to these propositions.
The day after the elections Bush signaled to the Rats that he would be open to considering an increase in minimum wages. Of course he was ecstatic (dare I say "orgasmic?") over the prospect of getting his open-border/Shamnesty bill thru Congress. Now the rumors about Iraq and this?
I'm hoping this is all just something the Dhimis are thinking could happen and are trying to push W into a corner, however, seeing that Bush does NOT know the meaning of Veto; is not known for his willingness to fight and take a stand, then I'm going to hold my breath--and pray a lot.
Lawrence Lindsey, the man who wrote this drivel, is a disgruntled guy, whom President Bush sacked a four years ago. Take what he says with more than a grain of salt.
You having a short term memory problem, are you?
Very well said.
"Clinton better than Bush? What about the sellouts to the Chinese? What about Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court? What about the non-response to terrorism?"
Clinton left us unprepared for 9/11. Bush risks leaving us woefully prepared for the massive long-term War on Islamofascism facing us and -- if he continues to show fecklessness and weakness on domestic policy by raising taxes -- we'll be left even less prepared for the competitive war with China and much of the developing world now facing us. The true measure of Bush will be the consequences after he's left office.
And I didn't say Clinton was better than Bush (nice try). I said divided government was better than this crap. The GOP was much more principled back then than it is now.
My loyalty isn't to some cult of personality or to any political party -- it's to the principles that made this country great...principles FreeRepublic claims to stand by...the principles that have been undermined by today's GOP.
"You having a short term memory problem, are you?"
Are you having a long-term memory problem? Do you remember the Constitution, the Founding Fathers and the principles this country was founded upon? I do. Do you?
First Robert Rubin floated that the dems should raise taxes because the economy is so good. Now we have Klinton stooge #2 floating the same bullship.
The FFs were all for a president diddling an intern in the oval office, with a cigar, selling stays in the White House, selling and/or giving our secrets to our enemies, using EOs to strangle our nation, whilst giving a foreign nation the SOLE ability top sell a commodity we have in abundance, etc., etc., etc.? Tell me, just WHERE do you find these things in the Constitution?
Yes, I am happy with this president and yes I do consider you a traitor.
Yeah. If he does that he'll never be elected POTUS again...(8^D)
Yep, and imho, one more reason not to pick a liberal for the Republican candidate.
Nopardons, what is up with some of these people!!!
All of a sudden any negative sneeze from the MSM and everyone piles on!!!!
I thought here on FR we took the MSM with less than a grain of salt, and now all of a sudden they are the gospel?????
I am confused???????????
It seems Bush had only one constant in his presidency: openining up the border.
They claim to be "CONSERVATIVES" and then spew DNC and MSM talking points. Since when, I ask you, does a Conservative want to cut and run, when we are at war and we are WINNING? Since when, I ask you, do Conservatives make wild claims about President Bush, that sound as though Michael Moore and Crazy Cindy Sheehan had written it all? Well, that's what I keep seeing here on FR, of all places.
*shrugs*
LOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.