“Low & middle income earners actually paid a much higher share of overall taxes back then as they do now”.
Of course they did. They also earned a far higher share of overall income than they do now.
This argument is such a ridiculous red herring. Quite a lot of chutzpah, too (for the uninitiated, it literally means killing your parents and then pleading the judge for mercy because you’re an orphan). So, hey, my share of the pie is 10 times bigger than before, so I should pay tax rates 10 times lower than before so that we’re all even, right?
It’s not about “sticking it to the rich”, it’s about raising revenue. You go where the money is.
By the way, the same argument works for cuts, too. You go where the money is, and that’s mostly Medicare.
To be honest, I think all the Bush cuts should just expire and forget the whole episode. After all, Bush sold them to us as being temporary, right? Wink, wink. So as not to increase the deficit? Wink, wink…
I remember the doomsday predictions from Kudlow and other clowns about the 1993 Clinton tax hike. Yeah, really destroyed the economy. Also, the enthusiasm for the Bush cuts of 2001-2003. Wow, that really worked out well.
PS: Schiff qualifies as a clown, too, just so you know.
