Give Us the Break
There is no doubt that W has been a big disappointment to conservatives who favor a smaller, less intrusive government. But on one issue he is dead on. Making the tax cuts permanent. We grew our way out of the last deficit and we'll grow our way out of this one as well. However, let me go on this meager record as saying that I'd prefer we spending cut our way out of the current deficit, but I don't see that happening under any administration.
Posts
1 comment:
Before things get nasty, I want to extend this hug, tax-cuts=good. Now to the daggers. One, I would prefer if the tax-cuts came more from the middle class than the wealthy. If the goal is growth, then place the money where it is most likely to be spent. A much greater percentage of marginal dollars get spent at the middle-class level than at in the upper tax brackets (quick plug for flat tax here-hooray flat taxes). More spending at the middle class level generates more returns for the upper class so its a double benefit. My concern is that Bush's tax-cuts mostly target the upper end of the brackets.
I'm also not sold on the "grow our way out of the problem" philosophy. The data is very muddled and mixed in this area, and you can read into it whaterver you're looking for. Empirically, I can't see how increasing spending while decreasing revenue works. I get the smaller piece of a bigger pie concept, but its a high risk, low reward proposition. Maybe, just maybe, it makes more sense to balance the budget. If taxes are high enough to cover spending, that might spur the tax-payers to look closer at spending, and then demand that spending come down so their taxes come down. Growth as a solution feels like snake-oil. Generally the painless solution doesn't work, just ask any dieter.
Post a Comment