Bush's tax cuts were pathetic, consider job creation during his entire first term

[ProSense]

<...>

The White House Council of Economic Advisers predicted that the economy would generate about 300,000 jobs per month in 2003 and 2004. In December 2002, the Macroeconomic Advisers consulting group projected an average monthly job creation of about 184,000 in 2003 and 224,000 in 2004. And, ever since the recession was declared over, numerous economists have expressed disappointment whenever monthly job creation fell below 150,000. In a historical context, most of the job growth expectations were not necessarily unrealistic (see Figure 1). The 1980s averaged a creation of 151,000 jobs per month, and the 1990s averaged a creation of 181,000 jobs per month. From the beginning of 2000 to the end of 2004, however, the U.S. economy added only 29,000 jobs per month on average.

Between June 2003 and the end of 2004 the economy has created an average of only 126,000 jobs per month, which, on the basis of the above calculations, should have caused the unemployment rate to rise.4 The apparent paradox is that over this same time period the unemployment rate (depicted in Figure 2) has declined steadily.

<...>

PDF

Bush signed his first tax cuts in June 2001: Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001

He signed his next tax cuts in may 2003: Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003

[KingFlorez]

1. Tax cuts for the top 2% don't spur job growth

Those people do not use the money to create new jobs, it goes into savings and investments. Creating more jobs does not result in the type of profit that the top brackets want. It's a myth that these sort of tax cuts spur growth.