Incomes Grew After Past Tax Cuts, but Guess Whose
- 6 years ago
Incomes Grew After Past Tax Cuts, but Guess Whose
That is less surprising when one realizes that for all the stories about harried workers in the Midwest shouldering an unbearable tax burden, tax relief since Reagan’s fateful State of
the Union speech has mostly been aimed at benefiting the well-to-do: The average tax rate for Americans in the bottom half of the income pile was higher in 2014 than it was in 1980.
For one in two Americans, though — those in the bottom half of the income pile — income actually shrank on Reagan’s watch.
“If we had the money,” Steven Ramos, a school administrator, told somebody on the president’s
staff, “it would help us reach our goal of paying off our personal debt in two years’ time.”
And yet, during Mr. Bush’s two terms, the average income of the bottom half of Americans slid from $17,827 to $17,473, accounting for inflation.
President George W. Bush passed two rounds of tax cuts, in 2001 and 2003, arguing
that the United States had a budget surplus “because taxes are too high and government is charging more than it needs.”
To make his case, in 2001 Mr. Bush deployed the Ramos family of Pennsylvania, which he said would save $2,000 from his first round of cuts.
Speaker Paul D. Ryan might chuckle fondly at Reagan’s tale of woe from a worker in the Midwest — a precursor to Mr. Ryan’s “Cindy”— who made the everyman’s
case for a tax cut by complaining, “I’m bringing home more dollars than I ever believed I could possibly earn, but I seem to be getting worse off.”
For all the backslapping over a job well done, however, Republicans are proving notably
more reluctant to acknowledge the true impact of the tax changes that Reagan wrought.
That is less surprising when one realizes that for all the stories about harried workers in the Midwest shouldering an unbearable tax burden, tax relief since Reagan’s fateful State of
the Union speech has mostly been aimed at benefiting the well-to-do: The average tax rate for Americans in the bottom half of the income pile was higher in 2014 than it was in 1980.
For one in two Americans, though — those in the bottom half of the income pile — income actually shrank on Reagan’s watch.
“If we had the money,” Steven Ramos, a school administrator, told somebody on the president’s
staff, “it would help us reach our goal of paying off our personal debt in two years’ time.”
And yet, during Mr. Bush’s two terms, the average income of the bottom half of Americans slid from $17,827 to $17,473, accounting for inflation.
President George W. Bush passed two rounds of tax cuts, in 2001 and 2003, arguing
that the United States had a budget surplus “because taxes are too high and government is charging more than it needs.”
To make his case, in 2001 Mr. Bush deployed the Ramos family of Pennsylvania, which he said would save $2,000 from his first round of cuts.
Speaker Paul D. Ryan might chuckle fondly at Reagan’s tale of woe from a worker in the Midwest — a precursor to Mr. Ryan’s “Cindy”— who made the everyman’s
case for a tax cut by complaining, “I’m bringing home more dollars than I ever believed I could possibly earn, but I seem to be getting worse off.”
For all the backslapping over a job well done, however, Republicans are proving notably
more reluctant to acknowledge the true impact of the tax changes that Reagan wrought.