Originally Posted by BigRedChief
Typically Republican tactic. We are not doing "X". You are doing "X".
The history books are clear. Bush inherited a surplus of tax $'s and the dot come crash occurred in March 2000 with the collapse of the stocks on NASDAQ. Come on man, this is just plain facts.
History books are NOT clear because correlation does not imply causation.
Not when other factors are taken into account. You should know that's a science and statistics claim. Your claim is a logical fallacy.
Bush inherited a recession from Clinton, just as Clinton inherited one from Bush Sr. This is the pattern the Austrian Economic school is constantly hammering home as being a result of Federal Reserve policies based on spending our way out of recessions. They call it the Business Cycle or the Boom-Bust cycle. It was going to happen with or without Bush in office or any tax cuts.
The dotcom boom was another artificial boom under Clinton in cahoots with Greenspan. Just as the 2008 and the "ownership society" under Bush was another artificial boom. The extra money put in circulation has to be spent somewhere. Real estate or stocks which creates overheated areas of speculation in the economy or cones. These eventually burst. They are not based on true value or increased production based on true market demands. They're inflated.
Tax cuts do not negatively impact economic activity by the players in the market which is the people. Govt spending simply crowds it out and that is a FACT. People who are anti-tax cuts are more concerned about govt growth which is just as much an ideology as those who believe in economic liberty ( growth ).