"Our intention is to give people, however you might stylize it, a tax cut or a pay raise"
About this Quote
A “tax cut or a pay raise” is the kind of phrase that wants to end an argument by refusing to have one. Paul O’Neill packages a politically loaded choice as a stylistic preference: call it whatever you like, the public still wins. The move is classic Washington reframing, less about economics than about permission. If you describe it as a tax cut, you cue ideological debates about government size and who benefits. If you call it a pay raise, you borrow the moral clarity of wages earned. O’Neill’s line tries to smuggle the first into the emotional legitimacy of the second.
The subtext is defensive and savvy. “However you might stylize it” anticipates critics who would accuse the administration of favoring the wealthy or starving public services. By treating language as mere branding, he implies objections are semantic games rather than disputes over distribution and fiscal trade-offs. That’s rhetorical judo: shift attention away from the policy’s architecture (rates, brackets, deficits) and toward the felt experience of extra money.
Context matters: O’Neill served as George W. Bush’s first Treasury Secretary, at a moment when supply-side tax cuts were being sold as broadly beneficial and pro-growth. The quote’s genial vagueness is the point. It invites voters to picture their own windfall while leaving unanswered who pays, what gets cut, and how long the benefits last. It’s a promise designed to sound nonpartisan, even inevitable: more in your pocket, no hard choices required.
The subtext is defensive and savvy. “However you might stylize it” anticipates critics who would accuse the administration of favoring the wealthy or starving public services. By treating language as mere branding, he implies objections are semantic games rather than disputes over distribution and fiscal trade-offs. That’s rhetorical judo: shift attention away from the policy’s architecture (rates, brackets, deficits) and toward the felt experience of extra money.
Context matters: O’Neill served as George W. Bush’s first Treasury Secretary, at a moment when supply-side tax cuts were being sold as broadly beneficial and pro-growth. The quote’s genial vagueness is the point. It invites voters to picture their own windfall while leaving unanswered who pays, what gets cut, and how long the benefits last. It’s a promise designed to sound nonpartisan, even inevitable: more in your pocket, no hard choices required.
Quote Details
| Topic | Money |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Paul
Add to List

