Ok, so Gov Perry had a senior moment in last night’s debate. It happens. Frankly, as someone who actually thinks these agencies do useful stuff, I’m glad when they can’t remember which ones they want to close.
And I can think of much better reasons than a memory lapse as to why the Texas gov’s agenda is wholly incompatible with the direction in which the country needs to head. Like his tax plan that loses $570 billion per year by delivering massive tax cuts to those at the tippy top of the income scale (i.e., a $1.5 million cut for households with avg income of $8.4 million). As if the low aftertax income of the richest households is America’s biggest problem.
In fact, all I heard in terms of policy ideas in last night’s debate was all the different ways in which we can’t or shouldn’t address any of the real economic problems we face. It’s all repeal (health care and financial reform), cut (taxes on corporations and the wealthy), ignore (housing, student debt, Europe), shut down agencies (well, nuff said there…), etc…
In a debate on the economy, I can’t think of anything I heard that might actually help the economy (the one exception was Gov Romney on China currency management). I suppose someone could raise the drilling stuff they talked about, but even there, regardless of how you feel about that as a national energy strategy, I simply don’t see how oil and gas extractors face an undue burden. To the contrary, they already receive billions in subsidies through the tax code.
Like it or not, we live in the most interconnected world that’s probably ever existed. Markets fail in ways that amplify risk and contagion, requiring vigilant regulation. American job growth was inadequate in the last expansion, even before we hit the Great Recession. Public policy must address the surge in inequality, as it poses a fundamental threat to our basic social contract.
If there was ever a time to turn to trickle-down economics, deregulation of financial and health markets, regressive tax cuts, self-regulating industries, and drill, drill, drill…this definitely isn’t it.
If ever there was a time to raise taxes on the rich, it certainly is not now. You know quite well that taking money out of the economy hurts the economy. Your party took a beating in November 2010 because the economy had not improved enough, yet you insist on stalling growth further by raising taxes. If President Obama had not included tax increases in his American Jobs Act, it might have had a chance of passing. One wonders if he ever intended for it to pass. It appears he just wanted to hammer Republicans for protecting the rich. Your party is going to take another electoral beating next year if you don’t drop your obsession with tax hikes. If you think President Obama can win reelection with an unemployment rate over seven percent, you’re dreaming. Either get the economy to grow or the White House will be given back to a party that does not accept the existence of global warming.
Tyler has clearly swallowed the party line. He should consider a few basic facts. First is that the taxation burden on the populace as a whole is at the lowest it has ever been since 1950. Second, is that he should Google up a graph of the National Debt as a % of GDP. He will then see that the ration came steadily down after peaking in WW2 at about 120% and then in 1981 when the “much revered” (why I’ll never know) admittedly nice guy Ronald Reagan instituted supply side economics, the ratio has risen ever since with the exception of the Clinton Presidency. Finally, as a retired old grump who happily sold my business in 1990, I can tell you that job creation does NOT happen out of the money that the shareholder(s) take out of a company as income. All business expansion is done with internal-to-the-company revenues, and the money that the shareholder(s) take out as income is pure unadulterated “for my fun”. So forget the chimera argument that if you tax that income at the same rate as Joe Lunchbucket’s $70K per year, you will stall job growth. That’s a load of BS.
I’m not a Republican. You would have divined that if you read my comment more carefully.
Growing the deficit grows jobs. It’s as simple as that. This is why Ronald Reagan created nearly 20 million jobs without the aid of an internet bubble.
Raising taxes on anyone is contractionary, meaning it shrinks the economy, meaning it weakens job growth.
Study economics more.
…seems getting away with it emboldens the perps. I’m reminded of the Iraqi General’s amazement when Schwarzkopf told them to go home…weapons intact. It is the same with the Conservative Brotherhood…hearings were not held into the fiasco called the GW years & they are back with a vengeance.
We are open to attack for failure to pursue exposure of the facts & motivation of the military-industrial complex & their willing partners…yes, the one Eisenhower warned of. What we as sentient beings believe in is the Joe Friday assumption…just the facts, ma’am.
Seems you can’t get a fact within a thousand yards of Congress that isn’t tainted with lobby interests. Whether it is the absurd notion such as trickle-down theory or expansionary austerity garbage or Love Canal energy policies, it is all E ticket stuff…Mickey Mouse.
The R’s haven’t had an original, refreshing & honest approach to economic issues since the Randian rush to Sqaulorville. They have no plans, just issues. We are skraelings in their estimation…living downhill & downstream.
Great blog, Jared. I occasionally forward these to friends. One suggestion: consider getting a Facebook page for this blog as one more means for dissemination. I’ve tried to get others interested in in reading it regularly, and a Facebook page would enable people to subscribe using that means as an alternative to e-mail, plus it would make it easier for folks like me to share specific posts through Facebook. I have tried to share some posts on Facebook, but without thumbnails etc they don’t appear that attractive or eye-catching.
Personally the argument of trickle down economics is at best an incentive like icing on a cake for investment not the core reason of invetment. Believe me my family has owned three privately owned nonsubsedized business in service, construction and realty on saling belongings with none of them being affected much other than original investment that would be required with or without taxes involved at all. So, my uncle was also an millionaire,, but I don’t think he nor many others would get along with a third world country for very long on thier own nor would you either for that matter. By the way, I’m a senior in college at a southeastern conservative state who plans on supporting on higher tax brackets like our vterns, elderly, disabled, and poor need us in this time not more bologna free trickle down economics that simply put aren’t the beholders of the truth just a means of destroying what little protections these people have.