Why didn't the democrats repeal the 'Bush Tax Cuts' when they had total control?

The Tax Policy Center’s estimate means that some 76 million households won’t pay federal income tax in 2011. But they still owe other taxes. About two-thirds pay payroll taxes, and most pay state and local income and sales taxes as well as excise taxes on gas, tobacco, cigarettes and alcohol. Of the one third who don’t pay payroll taxes, more than half are elderly who no longer work, and just under half are families with incomes under $20,000. Only about 1 percent of the population pays neither income nor payroll taxes and earns more than $20,000 a year, according to the Tax Policy Center.
For 50 percent of those that don’t pay federal income taxes, standard deductions and personal exemptions are enough to counteract their taxable earnings. A couple with two children earning less than $26,400, for example, will pay no federal income tax in 2011 because their $11,600 standard deduction and four exemptions of $3,700 cuts their taxable income to nil.
22 percent are senior citizens who get a more generous standard deduction, can exclude some or all of their Social Security income and may have tax-exempt interest from mutual funds and municipal bonds. For those who itemize, charitable contributions and medical expense deductions also subtract from their tax liability.
15 percent are working families, many of them low-income, who qualify for one or all of the Earned Income tax credit, the Child tax credit, the Child and Dependent Care tax credit. The earned-income credit is fully refundable, and the Child credit is partially refundable this year, meaning some households may get refunds from the government even if they owe no income taxes.
The remaining 13 percent are a mix of mostly higher-income individuals with enough itemized deductions for items like mortgage interest, health payments, or charitable contributions, education tax credits, or tax exempt interest to zero out their income taxes.
“It’s wrong to rail on the 46 percent of people who don't pay income tax,” said Paul Caron, a tax professor at the University of Cincinnati College of Law. “A fairer analysis takes into account all taxes paid—and by this measure, everyone has tax skin in the game,” he said.



includes a significant number of people who have been unemployed the entire year and cannot find work.) Moreover, low-income households as a whole do, in fact, pay federal taxes. Congressional Budget Office data show that the poorest fifth of households as a group paid an average of 4 percent of their incomes in federal taxes in 2007 (the latest year for which these data are available), not an insignificant amount given how modest these households’ incomes are — the poorest fifth of households had average income of $18,400 in 2007. [4] The next-to-the bottom fifth — those with incomes between $20,500 and $34,300 in 2007 — paid an average of 10 percent of their incomes in federal taxes.

Even these figures understate low-income households’ total tax burden, because these households also pay substantial state and local taxes. Data from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy show that the poorest fifth of households paid a stunning 12.3 percent of their incomes in state and local taxes in 2010.[5]
When all federal, state, and local taxes are taken into account,the bottom fifth of households paid 16.3 percent of their incomes in taxes, on average, in 2010. The second-poorest fifth paid 20.7 percent. [6]
It also is important to consider who the people are who don’t owe federal income tax in a given year.
Some 70 percent of people who owe no federal income tax in a given year are low-income working households. These people do pay payroll taxes, as well as federal excise taxes (and, as noted, state and local taxes). Most of these working households also pay federal income tax in other years, when their incomes are higher — which can be seen by looking at the low-income working households that receive the Earned Income Tax Credit (see next bullet).
The majority of EITC recipients receive the credit for only one or two years at a time, such as when their incomes drop due to a temporary layoff; they pay federal income tax in other years. In fact, EITC recipients pay much more in federal income taxes over time than they receive in EITC benefits. A leading study of this issue found that taxpayers who claimed the EITC at least once during an 18-year period paid a net $473 billion in federal income tax over that period (in 2006 dollars). [7] This finding shows that — while in any single year some taxpayers will receive refundable tax credits whose value may exceed their payroll tax liability — EITC recipients as a group pay significant federal income taxes over time in addition to the payroll and state and local taxes they pay each year.
The fact that most people who do not pay federal income tax in a given year do pay substantial amounts of other taxes, and also are net federal income taxpayers over time, belies the claim that households that don’t owe income tax will form bad policy judgments because they ostensibly “don’t have any skin in the game.”



Yes these people have it so nice...

I like this thought process. The tax cuts relieved us of $3 trillion dollars we would have used to pay bills and pay down the national debt. Now that the Republican polices have sent this country into the toilet, we need to continue them.

Like all Republicans, you tell half the story. Larry Summers was talking about extending the Bush tax cuts for the middle class. He didn't want the Democrats to get into a pissing contest with the Republicans and not extend the tax cuts for the middle class at the because the Republicans wanted the tax cuts for the wealthy also extended. Not extending the tax cuts for the middle class would have hurt the economy. Stopping the tax cuts for the wealthy would not have hurt the economy.

The Republicans were looking for an all or nothing deal. Keep all of the tax cuts or none of them. Their leverage was extending unemployment benefits. The They wouldn't let the tax cuts for the wealth expire without taking the tax cuts away from everyone else. The Republicans said that we needed to let the "job creators" keep the money so they would create jobs.

We know that giving tax cuts to the rich doesn't create jobs. How do I know? Ask Willard. How many jobs has Willard created with his Bush tax cuts? I'm guess none. Willard is not a "job creator."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news...

What policies did the Democrats force Bush to pass that pushed the economy down the toilet?

From what I've read, 911 cost between $280 billion to $5 trillion over the last 10 years, so thanks for not padding the numbers. What it didn't cost is 8 million jobs. The collapse of the housing marker and the collapse of the financial industry cost the country 8 million jobs.

The housing crises was caused by the Gramm Blily act, put into Clinton's last budget. It destroyed the firewall setup by the Glass Steagal act. Because of the Gramm Blily act, financial institutions like Goldman Sachs and Lehman Brothers were able to split sub prime mortgages into derivatives which the financial institution were selling to everyone. It's called Republican deregulation.

Mortgages back by CRA regulations 70% less likely to go into foreclosure.

http://www.businessweek.com/i...

President Obama has lowered taxes. Taxes are at a 60 year low. He lowered taxes on small business 17 times. He lowered taxes for middle the lower and middle class.

How many Republicans voted for Obama Care? 1 House Republican House member and 2 Republican Senators voted for Obama care. Not exactly a bipartisan vote, is it.

The next we go to war, maybe, just maybe cutting taxing and increasing spending will be looked at as a bad idea. But that will only happen if we don't have a borrow and spend Republican in the White House. On average, Democratic presidents grow the economy more than Republican presidents. Look it up.