# Biggest tax cut in history is invisible/ignored **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 20, 2010, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-tax-cut-in-history-is-invisible-ignored/557766 "2010-10-20T12:44:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Dallas\_Jones](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dallas_jones/32/3277_2.png) [@Dallas\_Jones](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dallas_Jones)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2010, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-tax-cut-in-history-is-invisible-ignored/557766/41 "2010-10-21T16:13:49Z")
> [@Mince](#): > > Dude you claim you typed slowly, but it seems you typed fastly. It just does. Android phone, in the dark, at work on graveyard. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2010, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-tax-cut-in-history-is-invisible-ignored/557766/42 "2010-10-21T17:07:23Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Tax cuts add to the national debt? You sure about that? Isn’t there something in the middle there you are not mentioning? Lower revenue + equal or higher expenses = larger deficit and growing debt. Pretty basic stuff there. Are you _quite_ sure you want us to believe you’re a tax expert? ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2010, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-tax-cut-in-history-is-invisible-ignored/557766/43 "2010-10-21T17:21:31Z")
Christ EL. You really are trying hard to dethrone gonzomax as the stupidest poster here. The obvious point I was making is that jackmanii was treating tax cuts as a bad thing because they always and automatically increase the national debt. But that’s not true. Tax cuts would have no effect on the national debt if they were combined with spending cuts. But many liberals take government spending as a given and bemoan tax cuts tat add to the national debt. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2010, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-tax-cut-in-history-is-invisible-ignored/557766/44 "2010-10-21T17:46:26Z")
You’re absolutely right. Let’s look at slashing the military budget in half. That’ll give us the most gain right off the bat. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-tax-cut-in-history-is-invisible-ignored/557766/45 "2010-10-22T04:20:37Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I don’t think that’s why voters are rejecting the Democrats. They’re frustrated because the economy sucks and they want to blame someone. The Dems are in charge, so they get blamed. If the GOP was in charge, they would get blamed, too. People are stupid. You can quote me on that! 🙂 I don’t think it’s stupid: it’s perfectly rational to throw out the bums when the economy is weak. It is _crude and ill-informed_, but not stupid. Reid had 59 votes because Franken wouldn’t be seated until July 2009. He could coral but one Republican Senator -Olympia Snowe- provided he cut the parts of the package that had the greatest bang for the buck, to the tune of about $100 billion. Republicans broke with hundreds of years of tradition, filibustered everything, put long holds on appointments that they ultimately voted for, sabotaged the recovery and now are reaping the rewards. That’s the way the Senate rules work. [OBTW, the fact that economic strength drives elections has solid empirical support](http://fairmodel.econ.yale.edu/vote2008/index2.htm). The Dems had some unforced errors though. Obama should have pressed harder to fill the [FOMC](http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomc.htm) with recession opponents. As it were, he only got an agreement to have 2 seated last month. Senate Republicans passed over Diamond, who won a Nobel Prize this month. In short if you want to win elections, worry less about triangulation and more about juicing the economy during the election year. FOMC appointments are critical, whether or not anybody knows who they are or what they do. (Caveat: the off-year congressional voting model is somewhat noisier than the Presidential model.) ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2010, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-tax-cut-in-history-is-invisible-ignored/557766/46 "2010-10-22T04:26:25Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Tax cuts would have no effect on the national debt if they were combined with spending cuts. But many liberals take government spending as a given and bemoan tax cuts tat add to the national debt. Are you familiar with the balanced budget multiplier? Have you forgotten about it or have you never taken macroeconomics? Or did you just skip over a more detailed treatment? Did you have any particular spending cuts in mind? Because I see a lot of spending cut advocacy that lacks a certain _specificity_. When you think about it, that’s pretty craven, as I’m not even subjecting you/them to constraints of political plausibility, merely arithmetic. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biggest-tax-cut-in-history-is-invisible-ignored/557766.md?page=2)