Do you suppose that 40 states have "booming local economies" and higher than expected tax revenues because of federal tax cuts? I do so suppose. When we get to keep more of our money we get to stimulate the economy. Government just pays more bureaucrat salaries and buys more '$5,000 toilet seats'.
Liberals have a penchant for complaining about a lot of things. One of them is that the rich keep getting richer at the expense of the poor. I've never seen them site a comprehensive study, so that's why I call it complaining. I suppose it could be because I haven't been paying attention to the subject well enough, but I think the fruits of liberal complaining--increased government control of every-freakin-thing--belies the fact that they do not have a good plan.
There are help wanted signs, it seems, in the windows or the little grassy plots out front of nearly every business in Utah. Alas, I exaggerate, but not by much. Anybody can get a job right now. Why then are there still so many people on welfare, by the way?
Cybercast News Service is reporting that Republicans are attempting to remove sunsetting (they would expire in 2010 as it now stands) from tax cut provisions that were enacted in 2001 and 2003. I say, excellent!
More money means more ability to save and spend. More money in the hands of the people means more efficient saving and spending. It also means that money will change hands more often, creating a multiplier effect resulting in such things as higher stock market averages and more jobs available to people.
Ooh! Deja vu!
CNS reports:
"The idea of tax cuts influencing the economy, producing revenue that not only comes in for government but comes in for taxpayers ... works and it produced good things," Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) said in a news conference introducing the legislation.
The bill would eliminate the "sunset" provisions of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, which are set to expire in 2010 unless Congress acts to renew them.
Walberg cited a recent report showing increased revenues in more than 40 states as evidence that the tax cuts have stimulated economic growth resulting in Americans having more money to spend.
He was referring to a June 11 New York Times article that attributed state budget surpluses to "higher than expected tax collections ... and booming local economies" but did not attribute this to the federal tax cuts. Walberg said the root cause of those booming local economies has been the federal tax cuts.
I agree. I guess if I had only two political party choices I'd still be a Republican instead of a Democrat.
PS--Cato has an interesting analysis of the tax cuts during the Reagan years. After the tax cuts, the richest people actually paid a higher percentage of total US taxes. Sounds pretty good to me; how bout you? Or are you jealous of them for being richer than you?
A Russian peasant was walking down a road when an angel appeared to him and asked "God has decided that you get one wish. Anything you want be it health, wealth or a better looking wife".
ReplyDeleteThe peasant lived next door to a wealthy successful Kulak. The Kulak was rich because had a herd of cows that produced milk which the Kulak sold for a profit.
The Kulak thought long and hard and then said "I wish that the Kulak's cows were dead."
Oops! The last line should read
ReplyDeleteThe PEASANT thought long and hard..."
"Anybody can get a job right now. Why then are there still so many people on welfare, by the way?"
ReplyDeleteTemporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients in Utah, December 2006 = 12,348 in 5,375 families (the most recent month available).
http://www.hhs.gov/
That's about 1 in 207 Utahns. My guess is the families are almost all headed by single mothers who cannot work unless they can make arrangements for day care.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the excellent illustration.
Richard,
You bring up a great point that has given me the idea of a subject for another post: how the sexualization of society has become a burden on single mothers and their children. I wonder how this ever-growing population contributes to the apparently increasing disparity between rich and poor...
They aren't tax cuts when you just shovel the debt onto the next generation. What we are seeing are actually tax increases on the next generation because eventually all this spending will have to be paid back with interest.
ReplyDeleteBut don't tell that to the me generation that want their cake and eat it to. Wonder how your children and grand-children will look at you and your generation?
Also there is no evidence that the laffer curve is true and if it was which side are we on anyways?
Marshall,
ReplyDeleteYou bring up a good point. National debt is in a large sense a measure of just how much too far Congress has overstepped its bounds. Just like every family has a certain income and budget, so does the nation. In perhaps an effort to get re-elected (90% or more of incumbents do) Congress continues to exacerbate the problem by shovelling out weevily, maggoty pork.
But it's important to isolate debt from revenue, because revenue often increases with certain tax rate reductions. It's an interesting science to try to get the correct tax rate to bring in the most revenue, but the recent tax reductions have stimulated the economy, and are beginning to generate more revenue for the government.
Now if we could just convince Congress that we need to live within our means...