Not only are the perceptions of and reactions to this tax cut varied and inconsistent, but all those who have a certain opinion on the matter have also obscured the economic numbers that should reveal the truth. These discrepancies have also been compounded by the timely change in the method of determining surpluses in the government and these accounting shifts have left some holes in the supposed massive surplus that will accumulate over the next decade. The recent nature of the tax cut has also had an effect on

A more economic reason for the Bush tax plan is the belief that by decreasing tax rates, the revenue will actually increase. This was the major motive behind the Reagan tax cuts in 1981, which, unfortunately, failed. This theory, works, on paper, however. Called the Laffer curve, this theory insists that when people are taxed less, there is a general increase in productivity and people actually pay more in taxes. This works, again, on paper, because it claims that the tax discourages people to work by decreasing incentives. If your hard work is going to go to the government, why not spend your time enjoying yourself, and gain that value instead of working harder to pay high taxes. The Laffer curve states that lower taxes will increase people’s desire to work and the economy as a whole will become more productive and people will end up paying more money because they are paying a lot at a smaller rate, rather than a little on a high rate.

This, along with the abolishment of the death estate tax, will allow the rich to become rich and the poor to fall by the wayside. Although the marginal rate cuts are progressive, they do not follow utilitarian principle because the structure of the American society is such that the working class will continually be overlooked and screwed over.

Bush has also altered the tax system to accommodate for the family structure, as the next two components illustrate. First, the tax credit on children is doubled to $1,000 per child, to update the growing cost of sustaining raising a child in today’s society. Also, the third component of the tax plan reduces the marriage penalty, which occurs when spouses file a joint return by reinstating the 10 percent reduction. These benefits are targeted at one-parent households that are struggling to make ends meet by attempting to work as well as raise children.

Now, conservatives claim that this figure does not include the extra taxes that the government will receive on the created by lower taxes increasing the economic productivity and employment. This is the Laffer curve argument again. There is, however, a serious problem with it. Bush’s tax system was not designed as a fiscal measure to combat the weak economy that will further detriment the ability to raise new revenues. The tax does not put the amount of money needed into the hands of those who will spend it, the lower-middle class and working poor. These people need to spend what they make for subsistence alone. The wealthy, who are getting the most benefit from the tax cut money back (says Bush, because they pay the most) will hold the money and not spend it. The lowering of the top tax bracket by 6.6 percent will give the wealthiest 1 percent of taxpayers 37.6 percent of the revenue.

the conflicting views, since all the sources are mere predictions and therefore cannot base their analyses on concrete information and experience. These differing economic forecasts will be identified and explained in order to make some sense out of the effects of the tax cut. However, the Bush tax relief plan must first be described and enumerated.

The Bush tax plan, although the motive behind it remains sketchy at best, reduces the amount of money every American has to pay to the federal government from their income. Although the tax

Some topics in this essay:
Tax Relief, Shostak TNA, Called Laffer, Paul Krugman, George Bush, Justice February, tax cut, social security, bush tax, deadweight loss, amount money, tax relief, tax credit, marginal tax, total surplus, laffer curve, bush tax relief, tax cut plan, support tax cut, tax cut effect, marginal tax rates,