{"id":5033,"date":"2011-06-07T01:48:10","date_gmt":"2011-06-07T08:48:10","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/?p=5033"},"modified":"2011-06-07T01:48:10","modified_gmt":"2011-06-07T08:48:10","slug":"a-date-that-will-live-in-infamy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2011\/06\/07\/a-date-that-will-live-in-infamy\/","title":{"rendered":"A Date That Will Live in Infamy!"},"content":{"rendered":"

The original date that will live in infamy, of course, was December 7, 1941.  Exactly sixty years and six months later came a second date that will live in infamy.  The damage done to America\u2019s economy on that day is every bit as severe as the damage done to America\u2019s Pacific Fleet in 1941.  Today is the ten year anniversary of the second date, the date of the Bush Tax Cuts for millionaires and billionaires.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\"7taxcuts1\"In the annals of this nation\u2019s fiscal and economic history, June 7 is surely a date that will live in infamy. Ten years ago, on June 7, 2001, then-President George W. Bush signed into law a package of tax cuts that would transform surpluses into deficits and inflict serious damage on our nation\u2019s fiscal health. <\/font><\/p>\n

To mark this disastrous policy, the Economic Policy Institute has released 10 facts to note about the Bush-era tax cuts on their 10th anniversary<\/a><\/font> (PDF). Those 10 facts, with data to back them up, are:<\/font><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n
    The Bush tax cuts disproportionately benefited the wealthy<\/font><\/span> <\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  2. \n
    The Bush tax cuts did little for low-income families<\/font><\/span> <\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  3. \n
    The Bush tax cuts never trickled down<\/font><\/span> <\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  4. \n
    \"7taxcuts2\"The Bush tax cuts were a poorly designed economic stimulus<\/font><\/span> <\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  5. \n
    The Bush tax cuts failed to create strong long-run growth<\/font><\/span> <\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  6. \n
    The Bush tax cuts were so expensive that they added greatly to the debt<\/font><\/span> <\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  7. \n
    The Bush tax cuts were much more expensive than advertised<\/font><\/span> <\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  8. \n
    The Bush tax cuts continue to be expensive<\/font><\/span> ute<\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  9. \n
    The Bush tax cuts eliminated the most progressive federal tax: taxes on large estates<\/font><\/span> <\/div>\n<\/li>\n
  10. \n
    A decade of Bush tax cuts are increasing interest spending today<\/font><\/span> <\/div>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Unfortunately, the Bush-era tax cuts live on, as the Obama Administration signed a two-year extension in December 2010.<\/font><\/p>\n

    President Obama reportedly has said that next time around he won\u2019t compromise on extending the tax cuts for the wealthy<\/a><\/font><\/font>, but congressional Republicans are expected to press the issue\u2026<\/font><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

    Inserted from <Blue Oregon<\/a>><\/p>\n

    When you consider that the tax cuts contribute more than double to the deficit than Entitlements and Domestic Discretionary Spending combined, the Republican position is clearly ludicrous.  They want to base 100% of the solution on just 17% of the problem.<\/font><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    The original date that will live in infamy, of course, was December 7, 1941.  Exactly sixty years and six months later came a second date that will live in infamy.  The damage done to America\u2019s economy on that day is every bit as severe as the damage done to America\u2019s Pacific Fleet in 1941.  Today […]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5033","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics","category-5-id","post-seq-1","post-parity-odd","meta-position-corners","fix"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5033","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5033"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5033\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5033"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5033"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5033"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}