How much prosperity arose from the Newt Gingrich tax cuts, under Clinton?

How much prosperity arose from the Newt Gingrich tax cuts, under Clinton?
When the Republicans cut taxes under Clinton, we ended up with a surplus and roaring prosperity.

So why do liberals insist that tax cuts COST money - when its the exact opposite ?

Best answer:

Answer by Reality has a Liberal Bias
Myth 1: Tax cuts “pay for themselves.”

“You cut taxes and the tax revenues increase.” — President Bush, February 8, 2006

“You have to pay for these tax cuts twice under these pay-go rules if you apply them, because these tax cuts pay for themselves.” — Senator Judd Gregg, then Chair of the Senate Budget Committee, March 9, 2006

Reality: A study by the President’s own Treasury Department confirmed the common-sense view shared by economists across the political spectrum: cutting taxes decreases revenues.

Proponents of tax cuts often claim that “dynamic scoring” — that is, considering tax cuts’ economic effects when calculating their costs — would substantially lower the estimated cost of tax reductions, or even shrink it to zero. The argument is that tax cuts dramatically boost economic growth, which in turn boosts revenues by enough to offset the revenue loss from the tax cuts.

But when Treasury Department staff simulated the economic effects of extending the President’s tax cuts, they found that, at best, the tax cuts would have modest positive effects on the economy; these economic gains would pay for at most 10 percent of the tax cuts’ total cost. Under other assumptions, Treasury found that the tax cuts could slightly decrease long-run economic growth, in which case they would cost modestly more than otherwise expected. (http://www.cbpp.org/7-27-06tax.htm)

The claim that tax cuts pay for themselves also is contradicted by the historical record. In 1981, Congress substantially lowered marginal income-tax rates on the well off, while in 1990 and 1993, Congress raised marginal rates on the well off. The economy grew at virtually the same rate in the 1990s as in the 1980s (adjusted for inflation and population growth), but revenues grew about twice as fast in the 1990s, when tax rates were increased, as in the 1980s, when tax rates were cut. Similarly, since the 2001 tax cuts, the economy has grown at about the same pace as during the equivalent period of the 1990s business cycle, but revenues have grown far more slowly. (http://www.cbpp.org/3-8-06tax.htm)

What do you think? Answer below!

Related posts:

1. The New Economy of the 1990s was supposed to offer prosperity like never before. So what happened?
2. It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes
3. what accounted for the economic growth and prosperity of the 1920s?
4. Q&A: Why do so many people still think we can tax our way to prosperity?
5. Q&A: does the expansion of civil rights relate to economic prosperity?