# Rolling back tax cut...realistic assessment **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 20, 2008, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935 "2008-05-20T03:44:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/41 "2008-05-20T22:07:58Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Besides, its not all that important what he knows, its much more important what the people he listens to know. The people who tell him that this can be done likely have the same sort of degrees as the people who swear it can’t. Economics is more like bean bag than it is like physics. [/QUOTE] That he is the only candidate who realizes that the gas tax holiday is a stupid idea gives some evidence that either he has economic savvy or listens to people who know what they are talking about. In any case, he was at the U. of Chicago, where you absorb economics. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/42 "2008-05-20T22:15:13Z")
[QUOTE=Voyager] That he is the only candidate who realizes that the gas tax holiday is a stupid idea gives some evidence that either he has economic savvy or listens to people who know what they are talking about. [/QUOTE] Has any Republican tried to claim yet that eliminating the gas tax will result in increased revenue? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/43 "2008-05-20T22:20:38Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Which hardly speaks specifically about Obama-- Harvard or no Harvard… [/quote] I’m satisfied that Obama is a pretty bright fellow, done his homework. And you don’t seem to be contradicting me so much as chafing me about a rhetorical structure. I think Obama knows more about economics than I, and, if he doesn’t, he knows how to find out. That’ll do. > [@](#): > > …Yikes. That’s what people said about Bush and his A-Team cabinet. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell were all highly regarded in 2000… Which, seems to me, does very much underline my point about who he listens to. You are not suggesting that he’s going to bring on that crew of Ricky Retardos? Well, then, what? > [@](#): > > …Only if you don’t know beans about economics. ;)… No, not much I suppose. Mostly I hear about how eonomics proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the changes I seek are impossible, can’t be done, never happen. Or a different set of PhD.s tells me, sure, can be done, why not? I’m sure you know much more about economics than I, **John**. Or, at the very least, more than I want to. > [@](#): > > … Hopefully Obama isn’t a economics wonk in the same sense that Cheney is a war wonk. From your lips to the Ears. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/44 "2008-05-20T22:23:07Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] It’s called “rational discussion”. [/QUOTE] A perfect example. You obviously mean **something** by “rational” but it has nothing in common with any English dictionary definition. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/45 "2008-05-20T22:24:56Z")
[QUOTE=Voyager] In any case, he was at the U. of Chicago, where you absorb economics. 🙂 [/QUOTE] Not [Chicago School](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_School_of_Economics) economics, I hope! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/46 "2008-05-20T22:38:40Z")
Their ideas about pizza are pretty fucked up. Not to make too much of that, but still… ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2008, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/47 "2008-05-20T23:27:34Z")
[QUOTE=Shodan] Nope, sorry, that has been supported by the rest of my posts in the thread (and elsewhere). Might want to read them. Or not. [/QUOTE] If they compare to the same standards of semantic rigor, critical reasoning, and factual basis displayed here, it would see to be not worthy of the effort. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/48 "2008-05-21T00:35:59Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] That would at any rate make more sense than doing just the latter two, as Bush has done. [/QUOTE] No, in fact, it wouldn’t. Not to defend anything that Bush has done in this arena, but at least his lower tax rates have kept the economy stimulated to some extent; raising taxes while at the same time increasing spending, and growing the deficit is a textbook example of how to cause a recession/depression. Spending is the problem. Spending, spending, spending. If governmental spending continues to expand, everything else we’re discussing here is a moot point. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_Door](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@Bill\_Door](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_Door)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/49 "2008-05-21T01:20:52Z")
[QUOTE=John Mace] Right. So let’s be clear: “raising the regressive Social Security tax” is a misleading characterization of what he wants to do. If he had proposed an increase in the rate, then that would be an accurate description. [/QUOTE] And I’m pleased as punch to be someone able to complain about the how much this tax increase will cost me. And while we’re talking about tax increases, why should my dividends be taxed at a 15% rate, while my labor is taxed at 25%? I agree that dividends should not be subject to social security tax, but raising the income tax on dividends to match the income tax on labor certainly seems more fair. Those two changes would raise quite a lot of money. Throw in the repeal of the estate tax elimination, and there may be enough for health care, especially considering that the government already provides health care for a lot of people already. Looking at it realistically, the government provides health care for the elderly via medicare, the indigent via medicaid, federal prisoners, veterans, retired and current government employees, and active duty military. Other than the last two groups, these have to be the sickest people in North America, and based on the reports I’ve seen on head trauma among active duty military, I’m not sure that they’re as healthy as all that these days. All the new system would need to do is start covering the healthy ones. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/50 "2008-05-21T01:23:25Z")
Not a chance the OP is actually going to be addressed with anything like a real figure, is there? Not even a ball park? And educated speculation? A WAG?? Anything? -XT ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/51 "2008-05-21T03:43:14Z")
Y’all do remember Obama’s chief economic advisor is Austan Goolsbee? > **[Austan Goolsbee](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austan_Goolsbee)** > > Austan Dean Goolsbee (born August 18, 1969) is an American economist and writer. He is the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. Goolsbee formerly served as the Robert P. Gwinn Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business. He was the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers from 2010 to 2011 and a member of President Barack Obama's cabinet. He served as a member of the Chicago Board of Education from 2018 to 2019. > Goolsbee was a member of the C... > **[The Strange Case of Obamaconomist Austan Goolsbee](https://capitalresearch.org/article/the-strange-case-of-obamaconomist-austan-goolsbee/)** > > Has anyone else noticed that Senator Barack Obama’s economic advisor has views that seem sharply at odds with the actual policies proposed by the presidential candidate, who, on economic issues, seems pretty consistently on the left? Obamaconomist... The _libertarians_ like him, he’s a big free market guy. He’s also a bit of a tax expert. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/52 "2008-05-21T04:11:07Z")
I haven’t seen a serious scoring of what restoring the pre-Bush tax rates for upper income earners, but [here](http://www.ctj.org/pdf/gwb0602c1.pdf) is a PDF of a 2002 projection of the revenue that was not collected because of the 2001 tax cuts. If Obama says he wants to restore the tax rates for those earning over $250k, we’re looking at roughly the top 3% of earners. In that case, we’re looking at the neighborhood of at least $80 billion per year in additional tax revenue. It could be higher, depending if there are any proposals relating to the estate tax or taxes on investment dividends, to name two examples. Those taxes aren’t considered in the linked table because they were enacted later. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/53 "2008-05-21T04:17:08Z")
also… In terms of tax avoidance, it also depends on specifics, but I think the general idea of raising taxes usually includes closing down avenues of avoiding income taxes. And it’s not like people think: oh, my tax rates have gone down, so I’m going to stop using whatever shelters are available to me until tax rates go back up. I’m of the mind that people are always trying to minimize their tax burden, and I have a hard time seeing that an increase of what, 4% in the top marginal rate is going to drive people to extraordinary measures. I think rates of compliance with the tax system would be pretty much in line with the pre-2001 rate structure, which is what the linked table is based upon. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/54 "2008-05-21T05:05:17Z")
Thanks Ravenman for tackling the actual question of the OP. So, we are looking at a ball park of something like $80 Billion then? Ok, that gives me some food for thought. I’ll look over the PDF file when I get back home this weekend. I appreciate the info. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/55 "2008-05-21T12:26:32Z")
[QUOTE=Ravenman] In that case, we’re looking at the neighborhood of at least $80 billion per year in additional tax revenue. It could be higher, depending if there are any proposals relating to the estate tax or taxes on investment dividends, to name two examples. Those taxes aren’t considered in the linked table because they were enacted later. [/QUOTE] So, of that $80 billion, Obama is going to spend the first $80 billion on tax relief for the lower and middle classes, and the rest on health care? Uh, okay. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/56 "2008-05-21T12:59:09Z")
[QUOTE=Weirddave] No, in fact, it wouldn’t. Not to defend anything that Bush has done in this arena, but at least his lower tax rates have kept the economy stimulated to some extent; raising taxes while at the same time increasing spending, and growing the deficit is a textbook example of how to cause a recession/depression. Spending is the problem. Spending, spending, spending. If governmental spending continues to expand, everything else we’re discussing here is a moot point. [/QUOTE] Taxes might depress the economy to some degree, but on the other hand government spending does stimulate it. ---
**Author:** ![mazinger\_z](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@mazinger\_z](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mazinger_z)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/57 "2008-05-21T14:28:45Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Taxes might depress the economy to some degree, but on the other hand government spending does stimulate it. [/QUOTE] Which is probably the most inefficient way to spend the money, particularly in such a way, because government is such a large player, to effectively distort the market…a very Keynesian look about it. Demand should be stimulated through the people, less we welcome more socialism. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/58 "2008-05-21T23:29:30Z")
A stockbroker friend of mine just told me Obama’s prospective election has Wall Street in a panic because Obama plans to raise the capital gains tax. I can’t find anything about that on his website, specifically – does “reversing Bush’s tax cuts” apply to the CGT as well? I thought he was just talking about income tax. (My friend also insists CGT is wrong because its a “double tax,” the money represented by securities already having been taxed as corporate income, but that’s another debate.) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2008, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/59 "2008-05-21T23:31:06Z")
[QUOTE=mazinger\_z] Which is probably the most inefficient way to spend the money, particularly in such a way, because government is such a large player, to effectively distort the market…a very Keynesian look about it. Demand should be stimulated through the people, less we welcome more socialism. [/QUOTE] A dollar **you** spend (investment is a different matter) does not stimulate the economy any more than a dollar the government spends, and possibly less, because government spending is sometimes specifically targeted to stimulate depressed sectors. And Keynesianism is not socialism. And Keynesian economics have never been discredited, though some Dopers seem to take that as an established fact, for some reason. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2008, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935/60 "2008-05-22T02:40:38Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] (My friend also insists CGT is wrong because its a “double tax,” the money represented by securities already having been taxed as corporate income, but that’s another debate.) [/QUOTE] I wonder if your friend has a principled objection to sales taxes, since income spent on stuff has already been taxed. :rolleyes: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rolling-back-tax-cut-realistic-assessment/449935.md?page=4)