-
Obama’s Imbroglios
May 23, 2013 | 24 comments
-
My Rahm Reunion
May 16, 2013 | 16 comments
-
The Left Hates Us
May 9, 2013 | 143 comments
-
Such a Dynamic Duo
May 2, 2013 | 49 comments
-
The Continuing Crisis
May 1, 2013 | 0 comments
The Current Crisis
Republicans Are Losing the Tax Debate
What prevents them to make the Reaganite case for what demonstrably works?
WASHINGTON — Do my eyes deceive me? It seems that the Republicans are in danger of losing the debate on cutting taxes. Some thirty years after President Ronald Reagan proved that tax cuts encourage economic growth — which enriches us all — glum figures like President Barack Obama are roaming the land talking about the apolaustic lives of the very rich and the need to take their loot so we can all live better. Facts are facts: if you expropriated all the wealth from the top one percent you would but dent our national debt, and then where would you get the money for next year and the year after that? Class warfare is not the answer.
Nonetheless Democrats make the charge that the Republicans are defending tax cuts for the wealthy. Bravely stepping forward is Speaker of the House John Boehner and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor to say they are not, or that they oppose tax increases. Every time they leave something out.
In so doing they play into the hands of those who would prolong this economic slowdown. Thus Eugene Robinson in the Washington Post cites a Congressional Budget Office study that found that the income of the top 1% in America grew from 8% to over 17% from 1979 to 2007. And he claims this shows “why the Occupy Wall Street protests have struck such a nerve.” He did not add that high-income earners suffered vast decline in their percentage of national income from 2007 to 2009. Alan J. Reynolds estimates that they fell to 11.3% and that the losses suffered by the wealthy and by the small businesses was nothing to crow about, increasing, as it did, poverty and unemployment in the nation as a whole. As for the Occupy Wall Street encampments across the country, I think the American people are catching on as these lawless settlements are disbanded. They are perhaps the greatest concentrations of crime, petty and not so petty, to be found in the country. From public masturbation to rape, from muggings to murders — these encampments had it all, and they have yet to come up with a Mahatma Gandhi or even a Rev. Sharpton. Even the Rev. Jackson is staying away.
So what do the Republicans leave out in their rebuttal to the grim Democrats? They leave out that they have an economic model that is proven. It is called supply-side economics. According to the model, one does not raise taxes on anyone, certainly not in times of economic unease. The very rich might be slobs or they might be living saints, but like everyone else their taxes are not to be raised because they spend their money or invest their money in economic growth. They cannot help themselves. The way they spend or invest is always more efficient than the government. Money spent by the rich (and the middle class) leads to growth. Money spent by the government rarely leads to growth, and the following year the government has to come up with more money again.
Obamacare was sold to a gullible public in part with delusional claims that thousands of healthcare givers would be employed by the largess of the federal government. And who would employ them in the years ahead? If healthcare were paid for by private means, the healthcare giver would still be working in the years to come, and they would not be dependent on the government. Government is not a reliable source of funds. Ask a citizen of Greece or of Italy.
There is a way for Republicans win the tax debate. They should say that all Americans know better how to invest and spend their money than the federal government. Then they should say that under Obama the government is munching on up to 25% of the GDP. It should lower its intake back to the traditional 18-20%. No one can afford a government that consumes 25% of GDP.
About the Author
R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. is the founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator. He is the author of The Death of Liberalism, published by Thomas Nelson Inc. His previous books include the New York Times bestseller Boy Clinton: the Political Biography; The Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton; The Liberal Crack-Up; The Conservative Crack-Up; Public Nuisances; The Future that Doesn’t Work: Social Democracy’s Failure in Britain; Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House; The Clinton Crack-Up; and After the Hangover: The Conservatives’ Road to Recovery.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (56) | Leave a comment
More Articles by R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
More Articles From The Current Crisis
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/08/republicans-are-losing-the-tax
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Demise of Money and Credit
- Hannah and Her Friends
- Her Unrequited Letter
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Michael Tomlinson| 12.8.11 @ 6:18AM
Could it be after belittling the only President who never raised taxes, George W. Bush (Reagan raised Federal taxes seven times with the highest deficit to GDP until Obama), and embracing the fiscal conservatives we've lost our understanding that low taxes equal strong economic growth?
Time to tell Tom Coburn and his ilk to shutup and quit trying to make deals with tax and spend Democrats and unleash the free market to get America back to work and reverse the Obama/Democrat depression.
Alan Brooks| 12.8.11 @ 8:48AM
Your problemoid is:
though you still have a Reagan worldview, he and the other leaders his age- Goldwater, WFB, etc.- are gone.
So you have the bathwater but no babies.
Anthony| 12.8.11 @ 9:53AM
As opposed to a Marxist redistributionist worldview, do we have that right, Brooksie?
Don't worry Brooksie, we no longer count on the RNC to do its job and inform the American people. It is as hopeless an organization as Obozo is as a president.
Quite the contrary Brooksie, we got plenty of babies to carry the message, stick around, Nov. 6th is coming and coming soon!!! And neither you, the rest of the trolls, ACORN, Obozo, or Holder's corrupt DOJ will steal this election.
I'd get my passport updated if I were you.
Alan Brooks | 12.8.11 @ 2:39PM
passport?
why, is someone going to flog me with a wet noodle?
Chris k| 12.8.11 @ 5:54PM
Nice try with the Reagan raised taxes bit. The top tax rate under Reagan was 28%. It was 70%
c. j. acworth| 12.8.11 @ 6:25AM
The article speaks truth as far as it goes. I look forward to the second installment, in which Mr. Tyrell talks about taxation through regulations, handed down mostly by unelected beaurocrats.
Timothy L. Pennell| 12.8.11 @ 7:15AM
Wow. Emmett. Taxes? Karl Marx Obama just Crossed the Rubicon (Ideologically) with the "Best Speech he's ever given" (So says WAPO) proclaiming that "America's Economic System HAS NEVER WORKED". And you wanna talk about Taxes?
What Hussein did, with that Speech, was to Affirm what the rest of us have known since Saul Alinsky's little Boy came on the scene. He flew out of the Closet, like Alan Brooks being fired out of a Cannon. "Fair Chance", "Fair Deal", "Everybody gets the same". "It's not Fair", "KNEEL DOWN BEFORE YOUR GOD!"
The "Fairness"? That's how it always begins. The whole Kneeling down, GOD thing? That's how it always ends up. And then, everybody dies.
"I am not an IDEOLOGUE." (Laughter) "I'm not!"
Oh, but you are. And you're a Liar, and a Thief, and the Domestic Enemy that the Constitution foretells. And you're the Domestic Enemy that the Secret Service is supposed to Protect us from. OBEY YOUR OATH!
We have a Senate in Violation of the Constitution. A Senate that hasn't Submitted a Budget in almost 1,000 Days. A Senate that WILL NOT allow Bills to be Voted on. A Senate, run by an unstable man, who will help push this Country over the edge, if it'll preserve Cowboy Poetry for the Masses.
We have an Energy Secretary, lying to Congressional Committees, about Paybacks to The Muslim's biggest Donors.
A Bus Load of Radical Communists and Marxists and Maoists and Anarchists in charge of REGULATING our every move. We have an Attorney General, lying to Congressional Committees, (when he's not SUEING some of the States, on behalf of a Foreign Government) RUNNING GUNS to Mexican Drug Cartels, and overseeing America's first 'BLACKS ONLY' Justice Department.
And we have CONFIRMATION, for all of the Chris Mathews, out there, in T.V. Land, who can't look at this guy, without pulling down their pants, and grabbing the Lotion, that he IS what we've said he IS, all along.
He's a Marxist. He's a Communist. He's a Socialist.(Hey, O'REILLY! Wake Up!) He's a Maoist, and he is NOT an American.
But, you think we should worry about.........what?
Doctor Right| 12.8.11 @ 7:37AM
Yes...Taxes.
Would you prefer, instead, that Mr. Tyrell write a long-winded, self-agrandizing statement that over-states the obvious?
Oh...Never mind.
coal carrier| 12.8.11 @ 8:20AM
TP
Great post, as usual.
DRed| 12.8.11 @ 11:40AM
Obama actually said that trickle down economics doesn't work. Timmy, as per usual, is ranting hysterically about things that aren't actually true.
Lyneuss Fields | 12.8.11 @ 12:19PM
That's because "demand" should always be the determinate of what gets produced and consumed. Supply-Side Economics (tax cuts and trickle down) for business and the wealthy will never create consumer confidence which producers require before they will hire. This knowledge is as old as Alfred Marshall.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Marshall
VonMisesJr| 12.8.11 @ 3:23PM
MoveOn
Lyneuss Fields | 12.8.11 @ 5:51PM
Like Ayn Rand, I believe there should be a complete separation between economics and government. What I would like to see is cooperation and collective organization in addition to competition and individualism. I believe this is the trade-off free markets must make to rid themselves of government regulation and interference.
http://lyneussfields.blogspot......ative.html
Thom| 12.8.11 @ 6:51PM
Russia and China were both “demand” driven economies for the bulk of their existence under Communism. Their economy only produced what the government “demanded”. Likewise third world shit holes are “demand” driven. All forms of tyranny are in effect “demand” driven because the primary purpose of “production” is to serve a collective need and everything operates at the lowest common denominator then. Everything. “demand” driven economies are inherently punitive in nature where individual efforts and rewards are concerned. You want to live in an Ant Colony, there are plenty of places outside the US you can move to satisfy that need you have there…..
Lyneuss Fields | 12.8.11 @ 7:13PM
First off, Russia has a planned economy; lack of a free market is just one special feature of Communism. While China does have a capitalistic economy, citizens lack freedom, democracy and liberty. It's much easier to control people when their only choice is prison. Therefore, demand must possess "The Freedom to Choose" which is a special feature of America’s marketplace.
Warrior | 12.8.11 @ 5:34PM
Ask your Russian friends how communism worked. Do a quick case study on Greece and Italy and see how runaway socialism is working. A snapshot of England and Spain will tell you everything you need to know about liberlism and its love of entitlements.
The United States Consitution and the founding fathers ideas on limited government and personal freedoms has brought prosperity for the greater masses. Truly, manifest destiny was the start of our downfall which was gradual until Lincoln decided to kill the Constitution in the name of saving the union. Reagan's biggest mistake was trusting the Democrats when they promised to cut spending. Unfortunately for you, "Timmy's" ranting is intelectually and factually way beyond your limited abilities to comprehend.
DRed| 12.8.11 @ 6:07PM
Timmy is an ignorant bigot whose writings are nothing but fact-free childish tantrums. It says a lot about the current state of the far right wing of the Republican party that he seems to be one of the most popular posters here.
As to your comment about Reagan and the debt, why didn't Reagan veto those budgets when they got to his desk for his signature after he realized he'd been betrayed by the Democrats?
Lyneuss Fields | 12.8.11 @ 10:41PM
Those damn Commies--huh? They're even worse than fascists like you. Now on Liberalism, America's proven that doesn't work very well either.
What I'm interested in is your idea about Manifest Destiny. When you say it was the beginning of America's downfall, are you saying that President Monroe was arrogant because America took so much territory to control its people? And on Lincoln, are you referring to when he suspended Habeas Corpus? Because, under The War Powers Act that was constitutional. Perhaps you're referring to Lincoln's abolition of slavery. Come on and say it; why be so vague?
donserge| 12.8.11 @ 7:34AM
Republicans in DC are afraid of being demonized by the mainstream media and the "fact" that our tax system is "unfair" has been drummed by the media AND our education system for decades. Party invitations and likeability by the media is more important to them.
Carol| 12.8.11 @ 7:36AM
I know one of the reasons.
Luntz the Dunce - the idiot that is on Hannity from time to time with audiences - has told the GOP not to use the word "capitalism" because the Dunce fears it is a turn off to the occu-squatters.
I guess the occu-squatters are more important to the GOP then America.
Sicking bunch of pansies in the GOP - with the exception of Jim DeMint and Rand Paul and maybe a handful of others.
Dick Nome | 12.8.11 @ 8:18AM
It is the RINO Establishment dropping the ball on taxes, not the Republican base.
bill| 12.8.11 @ 8:31AM
GOP leader must address the payroll debacle such as:
Obama's pay roll tax cut will put a hole in the SS trust fund, and it will overburden the young generation.
GOP want to save the SS trust fund, and want to make it pay as you go.
Mike Hawk| 12.8.11 @ 11:54AM
There is no trust fund. It's a myth.
Al Adab| 12.8.11 @ 12:33PM
Personally I would be more than thrilled to be able to deposit my SS tax each payday into my own IRA or mutual fund. Not only would my rate of return be higher, the money would be mine to use as I see fit and my property (my income) would not be hostage to future government actuarial tricks. Think of what that would do to the capitalization of the economy.
VonMisesJr| 12.8.11 @ 8:47AM
Peter Ferrara pointed out yesterday at American Spectator that top marginal tax rate dropped from 70% in 1979 to 28% in 1986. This unleashed previously unrealized gains and offered incentive to business owners to realize income. Peter points out that the lower amount realized in income was held in stockholder equity or dispursed on other IRS forms and did not really change the wealth position of the top 1%, but simply resulted in different reporting and forms of income.
Moreover, when the top 1% realizes these profits, it spurs the economy and everyone benefits. But this does not fit Obama's "Class Warfare" Marxist creed. And if you look at it critically, most of the top 1% are in congress or crony capitalist on Wall Street that are "in bed" with Obama, Schumer and the Democrat Party. But somehow they forgot to tell us that.
One of the reasons that market is performing well this quarter is fear that the Bush Tax Cuts will not be renewed. So threat of higher future taxes has the same effect as tax cuts in the short term. Laffer forecasted a crash in 2011 when these rates were due to be raised. Now that has been pushed back to 2012. So the crash is coming, but just one year later unless Obama and Reid engineer them to push past the 2012 election.
Chef Schnauzer| 12.8.11 @ 8:54AM
The Republican Party clowns, pick one - Gingrich, W., Trump it really dosen't matter - the party clowns believe in large bureaucracy, endless (poinless staffs), status quo crushing government. The parties are beyond salvation. You really have faith in the big-government-weeper-clown Boehner? Continuing to invest effort, intellect or dollars into the GOP is a waste.
Denver Todd| 12.8.11 @ 9:03AM
I think that current taxation policies have more to do with wealth redistribution than revenue generation. Arguing for a lower tax rate in order to generate more income is not nearly as sexy as sitting at home watching your big screen while the government fuels your lifestyle by taking money from the rich.
Petronius| 12.8.11 @ 9:38AM
Bob
They don't care how high taxes are. They don't care how high taxes will go so long as the object is the income of the "middle class working people" who are trying to get "rich". Real money is and should be not only taken, but kept from those of us who in Their eyes, should never have any because They "don't like" what We would do with it: move into Their neighborhoods or try to join Their country clubs. I would simply put them at their ease. I'm not interested. For those of Us who want True Freedom, accumulating wealth is the only way we can escape Their power over us which is why the RINO's want us to have no more than we've got and the Liberal intellectual snots want us all to be poor. Why do you think the price of Powerball tickets is doubling as of January 1? They know that the average person considers his necessity of having to work for Them and Their Government to be one notch above welfare dependency and two above prison, and regardless of talent and ability ends up only with what They allow him to have. Ask anybody with a college degree and he and she will both tell you that the clock puncher should be deprived of wealth so that he can be controlled. He'll buy a muscle car instead of a bicycle, cheap beer instead of Bordeaux, and pig out on pizza when trail mix is better for him. Above all, Joe Sixpack should not have any disposable income because of his innate desire to consume. That is the bottom line of Chairman Obama's Proclamation that We cannot be Free from His diktat. For in his eyes, We are only here to labor to make the world good enough for Him to rule and maintain his cities full of willfully nonproductive Parasitic Bastards who do nothing but re-elect Him to confiscate Our Earnings with full, albeit passive consent of the RINO's expressly for that purpose. They have the white middle class tightened down in Their vice where the movable jaw is taxation and the fixed, raw unbridled power. And how dare we try to live by and for ourselves without hindrance from Him and the chuckling Plutocrats condescendingly joking about "the Cleavers" over dry Manhattans. Keep it up. The day is coming when We will say No More of this, nor tolerate Our servility any longer.
bill| 12.8.11 @ 9:56AM
GOP must address this issue before the voters:
We want to save the SS trust fund, payroll tax cut will destroy the fund, and GOP want to abolish that.
Mike Hawk| 12.8.11 @ 11:53AM
There is no trust fund, just IOUs.
Al Adab| 12.8.11 @ 10:18AM
The ongoing problem with having this debate is that the actual issue has been settled several times over throughout history. Low taxes prosper the kingtdom. Sadly we have all too many of our fellow citizens who actually believe they have a claim against the money and property of their fellows. Too many believe they suffer because others do not. As long as such a lie furthers the power interests of one of our major political parties, we will continue to see it spread and repeated. Rather than continue to debate the issue, thereby granting it some legitimacy, would it not be better simply to repeat that such positions as the statists take are lies designed only to entrench their control?
squalis| 12.8.11 @ 10:20AM
Mr. Tyrrel, Jr. did not read the article by Mr. Catron.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.8.11 @ 11:28AM
Emmett,
I hope you see this comment since it is on your own article as a copy/paste.
Ladies and gentlemen,
The thing that irks me most is the number of “good Americans” who sat out the last Presidential election. You sat on your fat butts and allowed these communists to take over our government!
That brings me to today.
Every time I read one of your posts about who you will NOT vote for, either sitting this next election out…or writing in…or throwing your vote away in a third party…I get very ill.
Then I get very angry all over again. We non-communists must have ONE goal. Out-vote the communists and fraudulent votes in a landslide.
I don’t give a damn if the last Republican standing is an idiot. He or she will at least be an innocent idiot, and we won’t have another chance to replace the growing power of our communists.
Speaking of the “last Republican standing”, we had better go back to Reagan’s ELEVENTH COMMANDMENT and Quit killing off our candidates.
Look, knot-heads, support who-ever you respect the most during the primaries, but commit here and now to vote ANYBODY BUT OBAMA! Next November.
We still outnumber the communists and the “takers” by a pretty good margin.
The future of our country will be decided with ballots next fall…or bullets. Bullets fly in both directions.
Please!
Get your heads out of your butts.
Look…even if Ron Paul out of some cosmic irony becomes our nominee, I will get off my butt and vote for the dumb sonofabitch. He is as dumb as dirt, but he ain’t a communist!
Margie| 12.8.11 @ 3:17PM
God gets very ill, too. He is ill over liars who seek to destroy His Own.
Angry? He is indeed angry with slanderers and false accusers of the Brethren.. and sisters.
"He who speaks the truth gives honest evidence, but a false witness utters deceit." Prov. 12:17.
NOW: You have made your list here, which I have answered like a fool.
Or did your stinking lawyer put that list together? Sure sounds lawyerly.
AND YET: You STILL hav not posted any of these supposed e mails you CLAIMED you ahve to show that I want to supposedly cheat on my husband.
NOW: For the umpteenth time: POST THEM!
YOU CANNOT, because there aren't any!
Reprobate scum.
NO LAWYER can snare me because I am honest. I am REAL, and I NEVER did as you accuse.
YOUR JUDGMENT WILL BE SWIFT ON THAT DAY WHEN YOU MEET THE LORD OF GLORY.
Daniel C Martin| 12.8.11 @ 11:44AM
re: "Eugene Robinson in the Washington Post cites a Congressional Budget Office study that found that the income of the top 1% in America grew from 8% to over 17% from 1979 to 2007."
RET explains why Robinson stops at 2007--because the declines in wealth at the top in
2008 and 2009 do not fit the template. But RET does not question why the baseline year is 1979, which had us in the depths of the Great Carter Malaise. The reason is the same--to fit the template. Thus, Robinson makes a Clintonian statement--literally true, but intended to deceive. I'd be interested to see the percentage of individuals in the bottom tiers in 1979, who rose into the top tiers by 2007. But I doubt the CBO would share those numbers.
Rhoetus | 12.8.11 @ 11:50AM
The national government in Washington, DC is a cancer that has metastasized and threatens to destroy the private market based free enterprise system.
megapotamus| 12.8.11 @ 12:10PM
There is still more to say. The other side of Supply-side, from the assertion that tax cuts (or lower rates maintained) will encourage or foster growth is that tax hikes WILL NOT reap the revenues they project and, if the blow to the economy is hard enough, actually reduce revenues to the precious, precious Treasury. This simple observation seems to have been forgotten by all even though the logic of maintaining the Bush tax rates and the temporary payroll levee reduction (the most accurate description I can concoct for Obama's cut) admits this premise. Who believes that a ten percent tax rate increase will yield ten percent more revenue? Does anyone? Not even Obama himself.
Jennifer| 12.8.11 @ 12:33PM
Trust Republicans to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.
Cookie Sewell| 12.8.11 @ 12:40PM
Why not try something completely different (apologies to John Cleese & Co)?
If all of the targeted "rich" -- the small businessmen earning a purported (e.g. before taxes and paying the salaries and fees of employees) $250,000 or more shut down for one day and show the public how much of American business and trade they really account for?
If you can't get gas at a station, or go to Jiffy Lube, or go to McDonalds, or any local business not run by a major corporation, one would think it would finally sink in how big the so-called "1%" REALLY is and how tiresome the bleating of the Progressives has become.
David W| 12.8.11 @ 12:51PM
If a democrat passes gas, pretty soon every other democrat and member of the MSM passes gas in the exact same amount with the exact same composition. They coordinate, somehow, their message. No matter how wrong they are, how stupid their argument or support is, their message is consistent. This message is heard over and over again regardless of the person talking.
Republican rarely have a consistent viewpoint, let along a talking point. There is no consistency. Also they are afraid to call out the hypocrisy of those wanting to raise taxes (Buffet, Moore, Obama, Kerry, etc.). Finally, they need to continue to use facts, but they need to start adding emotional appeal (the democrats have the emotional appeal, but few facts to support it).
Unfortunately, while Obama is able to freely spew his lies and total BS, the Republican candidates are having to deal with each other and the MSM. Again, I wonder where the heck the RNC is.
Simon Templar| 12.8.11 @ 1:30PM
David W.... excellent observations and points.
Who Knows?| 12.8.11 @ 1:30PM
There is nothing new under the sun.
It’s still all about the takers verses the makers.
Check this out. I’m almost 70, so I remember my first newbie economics “lessons” that took place under JFK.
I spied a book by one James Tobin at the library free bin, and the name struck a bell---he was an economic advisor to the man from Camelot. Just reading the blurb on the back was enough to bring to mind the first sentence above.
“Mr. Tobin recommends placing top priority on full employment and high production of useful goods and services and argues against what he sees as fiscal obsessions in the name of sound finance---balancing the budget, limiting the national debt, protecting our gold reserves, preventing inflation---in his view, a catalogue of ‘shibboleths and taboos’ designed to scare the layman away from a commonsense pragmatic approach to economic policy.”
The book was published in 1966, consisting of 18 essays he’d written in the previous 15 years.
Hey---fuggedabout inflation, national debt, balancing the budget, the gold reserves!
They are SHIBBOLETHS and TABOOS!
Yes, the takers have LONG been doing their best to destroy the makers, and the miracle, IMHO, is that despite their nihilistic best efforts, enough makers survived and thrived to keep increasing the economic pie. However, just imagine what would happen if the takers were relegated to the ash heap of history. I can easily see a doubling of NORMAL economic growth if they’d mostly stop their enslaving actions.
As for Tobin’s book---I’ve just skimmed his introductions to the sections, so far, and easily spotted many totally ignorant statements. Here are a couple of beauts---
“One man’s surplus is inevitably another man’s or governments deficit.” Wow! I work hard and produce a plethora of tomatoes, and THAT’S “another man’s or governments deficit”. What BS!
Writing about legislation in 1950 and 1951 to finance the Korean War---“Nevertheless, it was doubtful that these tax increases would suffice to contain the inflationary pressures due to the war.” Ignoramus! Inflation is ALWAYS a monetary policy error---I guess he’d never heard of Milton Friedman.
Or how about this---“The subsequent boom of 1956-57 led to a resumption of cost and price inflation, and to renewed pessimism concerning the compatibility of full employment and price stability.” And this man was a presidential economic advisor!
Yes---nothing new under the sun.
Rhoetus | 12.8.11 @ 1:59PM
Mr. Tyrrell: Strike the word "traditional" in front of "...traditional 18-20% ." It is not written in stone that the national government should confiscate that amount of the economy.
Naturalborn Texicanette| 12.8.11 @ 2:03PM
Go to Newsmax.com and scroll down to "Politics" and at the end there is a great write up on Rick Perry.
gary siebel| 12.8.11 @ 2:58PM
You are obviously a hopeless case. You should get out more. Since you don't have the guts to go talk to the Occupiers in person, I recommend a nice, safe trip to the next Burning Man. At least that way you will get a little variety in your life.
If supply side was such a proven success why are we so screwed today?
But you are right about one thing -- the Repubs are definitely losing the tax debate, and all because they insist on defending the rich, who don't need to be defended. That's what the Senate is for, and it has always done the job very well. All Obama has to do to win is run against Congress, just like Truman. The reason Dewey lost was because he/they declared in favor of a huge rollback of everything FDR did. Guess what? The public didn't think the same way because they didn't dwell in Ivory Towers.
You really do need to get out more.
Larry| 12.8.11 @ 9:57PM
"If supply side was such a proven success why are we so screwed today?"
A good place to start. Consider that one of the things that Democrats (and some Republicans) have been trying to do for some time now is to make all housing "affordable." That myth, along with the not-so-cottage industry that rose around the myth, was the single most important thing to collapse the economy. When the only real engine of growth of the past ten years became credit and housing, that was where the trouble began.
Now that is not to say that credit has never been popular in America before 2000. It has been a part of American life since the founding. But the way that credit was expanded, with the help of the Internet, indifference by banks and other financial institutions (along with their regulators), and a whole bunch of crazy new ideas aided by computer formulas that supposedly "guaranteed" that there would never be a major financial meltdown, has in effect almost destroyed the prosperity of the last ten years.
Supply side has nothing to do with the reckless expansion of credit and financing gimmicks that resulted in the disaster of 2008.
That having been said, the Occupy [Wherever] folks are a phenomenon invented by Obama and his leftist buddies to facilitate the class war he wages in this country in order to obtain re-election. In other words, it is a mere political feint, which some people have been stupid enough to buy off on. Which I find somewhat amusing, by the way, because if you read your history and get out a little bit yourself, Gary, you might find that as societies go in the course of history, American society is actually nowhere near as disparate in terms of class as everyone thinks it is. And it is nowhere near as class-conscious when you put things in total perspective.
Margie| 12.8.11 @ 3:29PM
Sorry:
Anybody but Obama OR RON PAUL.
Unless you want to wake up to cheap dope at Walmart, hookers on every corner, or hey, maybe at your local Walmart, too. Maybe they'll have a department of hookers, who knows?
How about the withdrawal of our Troops from EVERYWHERE?
How about maybe sanctions against Israel and a renewed LOVE towards the Palestinian "pals?"
To me, voting for Ron Paul would be no different, and in fact maybe worse, than a vote for Obummer.
Imagine who RuPaul, the Blame America Firster, would put in his administration?
Dennis Kucinch as Secretary of Defense, anyone?
Joint Chiefs of Staff?
How about Ambassador to Israel?
Nope, not me. I will sit this one out and it'll be the first time in my life.
But hey, there're enough sane people left in this country still... right?
I mean, Ron Paul WON'T become the nominee, right?
He hasn't a chance, right?
Clint| 12.8.11 @ 5:53PM
Dr. Ron Paul Clears The Shih Tzus Outta The Shit Zoo.
http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-12.....n-paul-ad/
The Tea Party Rebellion Is Here And In Iowa.
Thom| 12.8.11 @ 7:17PM
The problems with discussions about tax policies, in general is that they take place in a vacuum. The IRS says I pay 45% more income tax than the average tax payer at my income level. It also says the average interest/dividend income for that same income level is several thousand dollars a year yet the banks are paying me 21 cents a month on a lot of money I have in the bank and it would take a lot of ROR in this market to produce that level of dividend income off even my sheltered 401K investments let alone taxable income off same. Thus there are no average tax payers in existence and because our tax policies are a slew of convoluted social justice polices with thousands of resultant special interest groups rent seeking every deduction or tax credit they can qualify for you can’t win the “tax” argument because you have 10,000 golden calves embedded in the tax code itself. I paid 14.7% of my income to the Federal government last year and will never earn what Chelsea Clinton made in her first make believe job out of college. I have a mortgage deduction too and I paid over 20% in 1980. What percent did you pay in income taxes to the Federal Government last year? A friend of mine with three home schooled kids a wife that does not work outside the home and each person in the household having a vehicle newer than mine paid 0 income taxes last year and works one full time and two part time jobs….. How do you cut his Federal Income taxes? (and the rest of the other half that pay nothing)
Larry| 12.8.11 @ 10:04PM
You have, in many respects, hit the nail on the head. Our tax system is a mess. And it won't change anytime soon, unfortunately. Too many people have a vested interest in the status quo. Read Burton Folsom's piece on FDR's class warfare strategy to see what I mean. The country will almost have to collapse, I believe, before this can be turned around.
T. Lindow| 12.8.11 @ 8:06PM
Obama wants to take money from the rich not to balance the budget, but simply because he doesn't like other people being rich. It's not fair! He couldn't care less about that silly deficit.
T. Lindow| 12.8.11 @ 8:06PM
Obama wants to take money from the rich not to balance the budget, but simply because he doesn't like other people being rich. It's not fair! He couldn't care less about that silly deficit.
POST American| 12.8.11 @ 9:56PM
--------------------FINAL WORD------------------------
ONE AND ALL ----CHECK OUT
the Anthony Sutton interviews uncensored
on Youtube.
Not only does he lay out the Wall Street,
Rockefeller CFR et al set up of the Bolsheviks
---and later the NAZIS and RED Chinese
and GENOCIDE
--BUT--
he offers some startling observations
and info on Reagan's 'inexplicable'
green-lighting of MASSIVE transfers
of economy and technology to RED China.
All this under the auspices of VP Bush Sr.
------------This interview was from 1980!------------
-----------------ESSENTIAL INTEL--------------------
Sierra| 12.9.11 @ 12:28AM
Cry me a river--time to tax the heck out of the greedy rich who are ruining our great nation.
idalily| 12.9.11 @ 1:59PM
Are you serious? Define "greedy." Define "rich."
Who are these greedy rich of whom you speak? And how is it morally acceptable to tax them at a higher rate than everyone else? Please explain.
ralph| 1.28.12 @ 2:35PM
Austerity measures for Southern European Countries, and action that the majority of financial experts agree is the right medicine. This means cut government social programs and benefits, and raise taxes. Great advice for other countries, but for the USA, just cut and pretend that supply side economics is real, when in reality it is a false choice.