Mathew Yglesias Is A Dishonest Far Left Crank Who Is Incapable of Understanding Economics
Posted by Jim Hoft on Thursday, November 18, 2010, 8:49 PM
Matthew Yglesias – Dishonest Far Left Crank
Matthew, if you don’t understand economics, please don’t report on economics.
Today this far left hack reported on the Bush tax cuts and their effects on the economy. He used this chart as evidence for his argument that the Bush tax cuts were not effective.
Do you notice anything strange about this chart? The chart breaks down economic growth into 5 year segments. Notice that the chart breaks up the Bush years from 2001 to 2005- during the Clinton recession and 9-11 – and 2006 to 2010- including the mortgage meltdown of 2008 and Obama’s failed first two years in office. Of course, breaking up the Bush years in this way is a clever way for big government statists to misrepresent the tax cut effects on the US economy.
THE TRUTH – BUSH TAX CUTS GREW THE ECONOMY.
During the Bush years, despite the 2000 Recession, the attacks on 9-11, the stock market scandals, Hurricane Katrina, and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush Administration was able to reduce the budget deficit from 412 billion dollars in 2004 to 162 billion dollars in 2007, a sixty percent drop. In 2004 the federal budget deficit was 412 billion dollars. In 2005 it dropped to 318 billion dollars. In 2006 the deficit dipped to 248 billion dollars. And, in 2007 it fell below 200 billion to 162 billion dollars. During the Bush years the average unemployment rate was 5.2 percent, the economy saw the strongest productivity growth in four decades and there was robust GDP growth.
Not only were more jobs lost after the 9-11 attacks in 2001 than in the 2008 market crash, but more jobs were created by President Bush’s pro-business policies and tax cuts than by the Obama-Pelosi “spend your way to hell” Keynesian failure.
THE REALITY – OBAMA’S BIG GOVERNMENT TAX & SPEND POLICIES CRIPPLED THE ECONOMY
Obama’s trillion dollar stimulus package failed.
Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi tripled the national deficit last year by nearly a trillion dollars – something unheard of in our nation’s history.
After an unheard of record deficit last year of $1.4 Trillion the economy is on track to experience a $1.3 Trillion deficit this year.
Now Matthew Yglesias and the far left want you to believe that the Bush tax cuts did not work.
It’s a lie.
(Thanks to Wake Up America for the help.)
ADVERTISEMENT
-
Featured Story:
Rev. Jeremiah Wright: Barack Obama Has Done Nothing For Black Community (Video)
Published May 16, 2012 at 7:37 pm - 46 Comments
OLD FAN commented:
Well done and stated Mr. Hoft.
The old swindle by the liars pushing the disastrous Democratic Party.
One would think they would actually want to offer policies which are helpful for Americans, instead of being so stuck on a demented partisan devotion.
Democrats continue to try to deny reality, and actually are looking quite insane these days.
It is so deeply childish, and continues to make life difficult for all.
BigAlSouth commented:
Oh, he understands it alright. That is why he has to cheat to minimize the benefits of tax cuts.
Ladue Pundit commented:
Figures lie and liars figure, Matthew Yglesias being the latest.
Democrats are not good with numbers. Recall their percentage diificulties when the stimulus money wound up in higher proportions (per person) in blue states.
Unemployment claims rose again today, gas is up, and home prices are still plummeting. People believe what they are actually experiencing, not some doctored chart.
Rusty in Alaska commented:
Chart is completely missing 1996-2000 !!! wtf?
Formerly known as Skeptic commented:
Um, Rusty. It’s second from the left.
Rusty in Alaska commented:
ok, most charts are in order by year. but not this one..
Pitbullll commented:
Libs come in two varieties:
1 – dumb as a rock and desperate for a demi-god to worship and any entitlements the deity might throw their way, or
2 – not so dumb but sufficiently vain and morally corrupt to believe they will somehow game the system and gain wealth, power or even assume a position among the ruling elite in their imaginary collectivist “egalitarian” marxist utopia, toward which any means is justifiable…
Put Yglesias in either despicable category.
MGCC commented:
Jim, you listed several economic headwinds during the period when Bush’s deficit fell from $412B in 2004 to $162B in 2007 – 9/11, stock market scandals, two wars – but you left out one great argument: Bush’s tax cuts were in full effect as the deficit fell steadily. High tax receipts under Bush tax rates got the deficit down to barely 1% of GDP. Those rates are still in effect (at least for a few more weeks). The problem today is spending, not the tax rates.
Gary W commented:
“…and 2006 to 2010- including the mortgage meltdown of 2008 and Obama’s failed first two years in office…”
And four years of Pelosi as Speaker.
tarpon commented:
Been seeing a lot of these imitation commies lately.
squeaky commented:
[Psycho-Babbling Obama
A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford
“Rather than face the fact that Obama is not a friend of the people, leftish commentators insist on conducting a psychological analysis of the president.”] the love’s not there and for different reasons. at the beginning there were those in the black community that viewed barack as not black enough … will we go full circle. and just why do some people automatically assume “greedy business” is solely republican? and shouldn’t we drop the initials and just address them as progressive vs conservative. as one commentor at black agenda said “Let me back up and make it simple for anyone who cares: Obama is a Republican Not So Lite.”
http://blackagendareport.com/?q=content%2Fpsycho-babbling-obama
Fred Beloit commented:
The chart clearly demonstrates that severe damage was done to the economy during the Dem takeover of Congress and the WH. Thanks Sr. Matt, you da man.
almcq commented:
Why don’t you simpletons try to read and think about the entire post; as well as Leonhardts’s argument where the chart originated. Tax cuts must be accompanied by spending cuts. That was not done in ’01 or ’03. They also were not made permanent (obviously) which is a problem. Also, one-third of the “failed stimulus” was tax cuts. It really seems as if your arguments arise from blind hatred.
james commented:
I don’t understand why the premise is accepted, “How are you going to pay for those tax cuts?”
Everyone knows taxs cuts INCREASE revenues and tax hikes DECREASE revenues because the activity being taxed decreases proportionately.
Shouldn’t the question be, “How are we going to pay for those tax hikes?” because of all of the lost revenue in response to punishing risk takers and rewarding people who wish to just park their money rather than risk it for little or no reward?
Chisum commented:
almcq,
Haters? Hardly.
A Textbook Example…
http://dennisthepeasant.typepad.com/dennis_the_peasant/2010/11/a-textbook-example.html
one-third of the “failed stimulus” was tax cuts
I guess that depends on how you define “tax cuts”.
almcq commented:
I didn’t mean to call anyone but the author of this post a “hater”. Dennisthepeasants’ observations on Leonhardt and Yglesias have been mildly interesting; I think he mixes macro and micro at will, just as he claims they do. The question is: did the Bush tax cuts hurt or help the economy? In another post Dennis says they didn’t do much. I agree except I do believe they have helped the rich get richer and they should now pay a little more in taxes.
Chisum commented:
The question is: did the Bush tax cuts hurt or help the economy?
The question is: If the Bush tax cuts didn’t help the economy why do the dems want to extend them?
I’m glad you found Dennis’ article ‘mildly interesting’.
Btw, Jim Hoft is no ‘hater’.
chuck in st paul commented:
It obvious! This guy studied under Jones, Briffa, et al. It’s a reverse Hockey Stick graph! If you cherry pick the data and massage it properly you can always support a proposition.
Fred Beloit commented:
almcq: “I agree except I do believe they[tax cuts] have helped the rich get richer and they should now pay a little more in taxes.”
Now where have I heard this ground-breaking new discovery before? Let’s see…I know, from the Wobblies. In any case it is more true now than ever, if you are going to cut taxes, only the well-off will get the cuts. The other about 48% who don’t pay taxes, and in effect many of whom are paid for not paying taxes, won’t get any tax relief. This is a pity. No justice, no piece…of the pie that is.
almcq commented:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2010/08/11/GR2010081106717.html
Chisum commented:
Lying About Bush’s Tax Cuts
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/03/lying_about_bushs_tax_cuts.html
TeachingZombies commented:
almcq: “I agree except I do believe they[tax cuts] have helped the rich get richer and they should now pay a little more in taxes.”
Call me a simpleton but If make and am taxed on 1.5 million then I invest those monies I kept because of the tax cuts and now make 2 million and am taxed on the 2 million even at the same rate; do I not pay more in taxes?
anon commented:
And what is supposed to look like a curve is elements OUT OF ORDER. Seriously, this is the most pathetic chart I have ever seen in my life.
humanpersonjr commented:
Excellent write-up, Mr. Hoft, with great content and superb execution.
Our self-enslaving brothers and sisters on the proggie-lib left really don’t want to hear the truth. To them, it’s much like Holy water thrown on a vampire.