Missing from the debate is the fact that, just like government tax revenue increased when the cuts were first passed, revenue will decrease (and the deficit therefore increase) when they expire.
Unfortunately not missing from the debate is the oft-repeated figure of $700B as the cost for continuing the portion of the tax cuts that would go to the rich. Since for the first 10 years the rich got maybe $80B of the $1T+ total of the tax cuts, president Obama is evidently projecting some serious good times to come, as the rich would have to earn nearly an order of magnitude more between 2011 and 2020 than they earned between 2001 and 2010 in order for the impact of their portion of the tax cut to increase so dramatically…
Missing from the debate is the fact that, just like government tax revenue increased when the cuts were first passed, revenue will decrease (and the deficit therefore increase) when they expire.
Unfortunately not missing from the debate is the oft-repeated figure of $700B as the cost for continuing the portion of the tax cuts that would go to the rich. Since for the first 10 years the rich got maybe $80B of the $1T+ total of the tax cuts, president Obama is evidently projecting some serious good times to come, as the rich would have to earn nearly an order of magnitude more between 2011 and 2020 than they earned between 2001 and 2010 in order for the impact of their portion of the tax cut to increase so dramatically…