To follow yesterday’s discussion about conservatives’ attitudes
toward the deficit, here’s National Review’s Kevin
D. Williamson’s take:
If you spend the taxpayer’s money, you have to tax the
taxpayer, at some point. You cannot magic that money into
existence. As I’ve been arguing - ad
nauseam, forgive me - taxes are a
secondary issue. The primary issue is spending.
As ye spend, so shall ye tax. The rate of
spending is the rate of taxation; debt and
deficits only push the date of tax collection into
the future. You can collect the taxes today or you can collect
the taxes tomorrow - but what you spend, you will have to
collect.
And RedState’s Dan McLaughlin
uses a thought experiment very similar to the one I
wrote about yesterday:
This is going about the question all wrong. Would
you rather have a federal government that spends 15 cents of
every dollar earned in this country, while taxing 12 and making
up the difference by issuing debt - or a federal government
that takes in and spends 30 cents of every
dollar? I’d much prefer the former. The Democrats
don’t want to have that conversation at all.
Oldefarte| 7.16.10 @ 12:07PM
I'd rather have a government that taxes 10-15% of earned income and ONLY SPENDS WHAT IT COLLECTS AND NO MORE. Furthermore, I'd prefer that same government only spends the collected money on military and infrastructure needs of THIS NATION, not foriegn ones!!!!!!!
Teflon93| 7.16.10 @ 12:40PM
The problem isn't the deficit, but the spending.
As someone who actually pays federal, state, and local taxes on income, I'm damned tired of politicians taking what I earn and giving it to their constituents who haven't earned it (after taking a sizable cut for themselves).
Red Phillips | 7.16.10 @ 3:18PM
"You cannot magic that money into existence."
Well yes actually you can. It's called the Fed. I seem to recall one candidate in particular who was talking about that issue last election cycle. Who was that? It's on the tip of my tongue.