-
Adieu, Adieu, Remember Me
March 25, 2011 | 38 comments
-
DeMint’s Defense of RomneyCare is Ignorant…And Dangerous
March 17, 2011 | 85 comments
-
McConnell Pushing Vote to Block the EPA from Regulating Carbon Emissions
March 17, 2011 | 9 comments
-
More Barbour on Afghanistan
March 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
House Passes Three Week Spending Bill
March 15, 2011 | 8 comments
The Spectacle Blog
In a column that he describes as a “luscious orgy of optimism,” David Brooks cites Joel Kotkin’s book The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050 to argue that America’s future is actually bright. The argument is based around demographics, specifically, the idea that:
Over the next 40 years, demographers estimate that the U.S. population will surge by an additional 100 million people, to 400 million over all. The population will be enterprising and relatively young. In 2050, only a quarter will be over 60, compared with 31 percent in China and 41 percent in Japan.
While he uses this as a jumping off point to speak about the dynamism of our economic future, at no point does he explain how any of this economic boom can actually occur within the context of our crippling debt burden that will impose incentive-killing taxes on Americans and cement a culture of dependency.
The Congressional Budget Office, for instance, has estimated the marginal tax rates that would be necessary to balance the long-term budget. It found that the rate for the lowest bracket would have to rise from 10 percent to 25 percent; those in the 25-percent bracket would have to pay 63 percent; and the top rate would need to be increased from 35 percent to a staggering 88 percent. But these numbers are only theoretical. In reality, the CBO tells us, “Such tax rates would significantly reduce economic activity and would create serious problems with tax avoidance and tax evasion. Revenues would probably fall significantly short of the amount needed to finance the growth of spending; therefore, tax rates at such levels would not be feasible.”
As much as I’d like to believe that the future of America is bright, I don’t have much confidence that politicians in either party will make the necessary cuts to the welfare state to avert the impending fiscal collapse.
View all comments (23) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Philip Klein
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/04/06/brooks-is-wrong-we-wont-be-fin
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
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
Patrick| 4.6.10 @ 11:32AM
The day will come when we'll have to pay the bill. And it ain't going to be pretty. Yikes!
Mark| 4.6.10 @ 11:56AM
At some point - and we're not there yet - the working population will vote to abbrogate the promises made to seniors on Medicare and Social Security. It won't be pretty. It will be very contentious and divisive, but they're just not going to sit back and pay 90% tax rates to support senior citizens' government benefits. They will be forced to accept higher tax rates for awhile, but it won't get to the levels mentioned above. I predict that Medicare will eventually be means tested pretty heavily, as will Social Security. Also, the ages of eligibility will gradually rise to where fewer and fewer folks are drawing on the system. Eventually, the whole ponzi WILL collapse - I just hope I live long enough to see it.
JP| 4.6.10 @ 12:08PM
Things look so dismal that even Brookes has to indulge in fantasy in order to put off thinking about some rather bad demographic, social and poltical facts.
Currently, the US has a fertility rate of about 1.87 per female. In Europe, where taxes and regulations are even higher, but the socialist state is more generous, fertility rates average between 1.1 to 1.7 . In Japan the fertility rates are between 1.1 and 1.2 per female.
Essientially larger, high taxed socialist nations do not reproduce. And even in China, the fertility rate for its females is no better than 1.7 (This is by design and by choice). So where will all of these entrapenuers come from? Certainly not China, Europe or Japan. And if they did exist, why would they come to the US, where marginal tax rates, government madated health insurance, capital gains taxes, and regulations are set to rise?
Brookes Op Ed make no sense -as usual.
Derek Leaberry| 4.6.10 @ 12:41PM
Brooks and Kotkin are both deracinated, culturally barren, modernist intellectuals. If either of them supports a historic trend or one policy or another, expect them to be against the conservative interest. They are anti-conservative to the marrow of their bones.
Margie| 4.6.10 @ 1:01PM
It is a well known fact that Liberals can't face reality. David Shnookums is certainly no exception.
Margie| 4.6.10 @ 1:46PM
On the other hand, here is the hope of America's future. Young conservatives like these guys. Remember the old song. "Teach Your Children?" Well these guys had had some good teachers:
http://patriotupdate.com/stori.....Us-Barack-
gsr| 4.6.10 @ 1:29PM
With unemployment, TRUE, REAL unemployment around 16%, do we really need to import over a million people per year legally, not to mention about half a million a year illegally? Most immigrants are poor and therefore need (or politicians are eager to provide them) with social services of varying kinds. Call it job security for pols. All for a price of course, the future voting loyalty of said immigrants. Nice scam, eh?
Most Americans favor reducing LEGAL immigration, not to mention cracking down on the illegal variety. We lack the will to even stand up for our country and say, we need not flood the nation with half the world's population. We are afraid to appear RACIST by simply reducing the inflow of immigrants. How pathetic we've become.
Kenneth E. MacAlister Jr.| 4.6.10 @ 2:08PM
How any so called conservative could even consider taking David Brooks seriously is beyond my comprehension. With "conservatives" like Brooks, Michael "I'm in love with Chris Matthews & Obama & just don't know which one to choose!" Smerconish, Peggy "someone left the mic on, damnit!" Noonan, David "conservatism cannot win unless the Republicans move left!" Frump, Kathleen "hurray, Sarah Palin just broke a fingernail!" Parker, & Michael "McCain will win next election if we're nice to Obama!" Medved, who needs leftists?!
New moderate slogan: RINOs: The anti- conservative Republicans! Vote for us be showered with praise from the drive-by, state-run media & Obamabots!
Missy| 4.6.10 @ 2:22PM
David Brooks is a worthless RINO; who care what the moron thinks?
Margie| 4.6.10 @ 2:50PM
He's a Republican in mind only. His own.
Sam| 4.6.10 @ 3:10PM
Margie, what ever gave you the idea that Brooks is a liberal? The man is a MODERATE and was rated as one of the top moderates/centrist writers in the nation by an independent group.
I grow tired of having to explain to you that independents like myself do exist and have more clout than any conservative or liberal ever will. We are the largest group of voters ( if you divide it between Democrats, Republicans, and Independents) and we will continue to control the outcome of elections. Barack Obama? Thank us. Scott Brown? You're welcome.
Margie| 4.6.10 @ 3:53PM
Well Sam, my post had nothing to do with Independents and how they vote. I want Independents to vote Republican of course, but that isn't what this is about.
Reading this write up Brooks wrote about Obama, I could swear I was reading a post by Liberal Reader. I wonder if Brooks voted him?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03.....rooks.html
Kenneth E. MacAlister Jr.| 4.6.10 @ 6:32PM
Sam, the only thing more breathtaking than your arrogance is your ridiculous pride in yourself & your fellow "independents" (re: don't stand for anything) in electing the most arrogant, ignorant leftist President in U.S. history. Please come back to Earth or all of the outside entrances of your house will have to widened to allow your swelled head to fit through the opening.
BD57| 4.7.10 @ 12:12PM
I wouldn't be asking for "thanks" for Obama, if I were you ....
As far as your "clout" is concerned - you don't win without whichever bloc of ideological voters you decide to align with in any one year.
Given the clear ideological differences between the two blocs, it's hard to see how "independent/moderates" have claim to a coherent political philosophy.
If you have one to offer, have at it.
David Brooks doesn't.
Jamie| 4.6.10 @ 3:17PM
Revelation 3:16 "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth."
That's a moderate; thanks for nothing.
Oldefarte| 4.6.10 @ 3:47PM
I couldn't agree with you more, Philip. Unless this country's educated voters begin the process of redirection in November, the US will become a has-been, third world, socialist country in less than five years!!!
bear1909| 4.6.10 @ 4:25PM
The Democratic Party's experiment with creating a permanent underclass in the USA is at an end, although it may linger a decade as it dies. The cash cow is not letting itself get milked anymore. And the only reason there is a Great Society model growing out of control is because it has reaped unearned cash from the most prosperous electorate in the history of the world. Now let's get on with removing this Communist traitor out of office before he gets us all killed.
Seek| 4.6.10 @ 5:22PM
Removing Obama will be a tough act. With a Democratic majority, it is a theoretical impossibility; no Democrat will cross the aisle to impeach. Even Republicans will hesitate -- and that's assuming they can come up with specific charges.
My advice: RINO or not, vote Republican straight down the line this November. All Republicans, consciously or not, belong to the ani-Obama party. Make this bum ineffective.
Phoenix| 4.6.10 @ 6:35PM
Vote straight straight-ticket Republican AND hold elected Republicans accountable.
Don't tolerate beltway fever! No more "Mavericks!"
No more RINOs!
Answers1| 4.6.10 @ 8:51PM
Anti-Brooks is usually right.