Fiscal Year 2004 for the federal government began in October. Which means that the numbers are in for 2003. Remember the "record deficit" of $455 billion? Well, it turns out that it was $374 billion instead. The reason for this is that tax revenues went up even as tax rates went down. Two questions:
1) why haven't there been mulitple news stories talking about how the record deficit turned out to be more incorrect "sky is falling" predictions?
2) since the media has taken the first steps of actually attributing economic growth to tax cuts, will they now start to acknowledge the fact that lower tax rates meansmoretax money, and that Dean's foolish ideas for repealing the tax cuts to raise money would have the opposite effect?