One of Bush's biggest tax-cut whoppers came when he stated, during the presidential campaign, "The vast majority of my [proposed] tax cuts go to the bottom end of the spectrum." That estimate was wildly at odds with analyses of where the money would really go. A report figured that 42.6 percent of Bush's $1.6 trillion tax package would end up in the pockets of the top 1 percent of earners. The lowest 60 percent would net 12.6 percent.
To deal with the criticism that his plan was a boon for millionaires, Bush devised an imaginary friend--a mythical single waitress who was supporting two children on an income of $22,000, and he talked about her often. He said he wanted to remove the tax-code barriers that kept this waitress from reaching the middle class, and he insisted that if his tax cuts were passed, "she will pay no income taxes at all." But when Time asked the accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche to analyze precisely how Bush's waitress-mom would be affected by his tax package, the firm reported that she would not see any benefit because she already had no income-tax liability.
The alleged lie in question was the statement:
"The vast majority of my [proposed] tax cuts go to the bottom end of the spectrum."
This was from his last Presidential Campaign, the Tax Cuts have been implemented and so people should know the results.
I am no expert of US Domestic Policy, as you know.
Therefore a simple question, yes or no answer.
Was this statement correct?
Please bear in mind that he never said "The Majority" which would indicate more than 50% would go to the "bottom end of the spectrum", he said "vast majority"... I would therefore expect at least 75% to be going to the "bottom end of the spectrum".
Being no expert, I looked for some company that could not be called "liberal" that had commented, and found the reference to Deloitte & Touche... not noted for their "Liberalism".
A report is reputed to have stated:
I have not seen the report itself, merely these figures quoted from it, likewise it was a report commisioned before implementation, so more correct figures should now be available.A report figured that 42.6 percent of Bush's $1.6 trillion tax package would end up in the pockets of the top 1 percent of earners. The lowest 60 percent would net 12.6 percent
To me that report meant that "The bottom end of the spectrum" ie bottom 50% to be very liberal received less than 10% (assuming that the 50%-60% received a whopping 2.6% )
This is a far cry from the "Majority" (50%+), never mind "Vast Majority" (say 75%+)...
There is obviously lots of scope to debate... actual figures will now be available, as i stated.
At the end of the day though....
A Yes or No answer....
Was Mr Bush being Economical with the Truth?