-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
In his economic address today in Chicago, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty established an ambitious goal of 5 percent economic growth and outlined a series of pro-growth tax policies. My friend Dave Weigel snarks: “Cut taxes so we can grow the economy, like it grew after we raised taxes.”
Pawlenty cites the economic booms of the 1980s and '90s as his evidence a 5 percent growth rate is feasible. Weigel acknowledges the Reagan tax cuts and the 1997 capital gains tax cut under Clinton, but writes: “The thing is… both of those economic expansions followed on tax hikes.” He counters with the 1982 TERFA tax hike under Reagan, as well as the 1993 Clinton tax increase, as belying Pawlenty’s claims.
But 1983 was also the year that the marginal tax rate reductions from the 1981 Reagan tax cuts were fully phased in. Those were net tax cuts and led to lower rates. After the 1986 Tax Reform Act, the top rate went down to 28 percent. I’m not sure Pawlenty’s tax proposals can stimulate the growth he claims, but it’s a bit much to say the '80s economic boom and all the revenues gains are attributable to TERFA.
View all comments (3) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/06/07/pawlenty-tax-cuts-and-tax-incr
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
David| 6.7.11 @ 7:16PM
OK, maybe all politicians are heir to wildly speculative hyperbole as a disease but Pawlenty's "Google Test" is just plain silly. Just because the private sector CAN do something, doesn't mean it SHOULD or MUST do it. Incompetence and/or willful misconduct PLUS the profit motive sounds like a profoundly poor choice compared to public sector incompetence and/or willful misconduct.
Clint| 6.7.11 @ 9:42PM
Club For Growth:
"Tim Pawlenty was elected to the Minnesota House of Representatives in 1992. He was re-elected five times and became majority leader in 1998. He was then elected Governor in 2002 and was re-elected in 2006. Since Pawlenty has never served in Congress, he does not have a rating by the Club for Growth. However, the Cato Institute, a free market think tank, produces a biennial scorecard on the nation’s governors based on their tax and spending policies and actions. Over his two terms, Pawlenty’s scores were:
2010 – “A”
2008 – “B”
2006 – “C”
2004 – “B”
Before that, he was rated by the non-partisan Taxpayers League of Minnesota during his time in the Minnesota Legislature. In 2002, the last year that Pawlenty was in office as a state legislator, he received a 75%. Over the years 1997-2002, his average score was 80% while the average House Republican score over that time period was just over 75%. "
Blogger | 6.16.11 @ 2:06PM
It's a shame what they're trying to do...
This tax cut proposal would cut taxes by an average of $490,000 per millionaire in 2013. It would boost their average after-tax income from about $2 million to $2.5 million.
By comparison, people earning $40,000 to $50,000 would get an average tax cut of about $700, or less than 2 percent of after-tax income.
I talk about it at http://wp.me/p195xy-13