Posted on 07/25/2008 12:47:56 PM PDT by Clairity
If you believe as I do that the tax hikes proposed by Barack Obama and Democrats are bad for the country, then we are in good company. No less an authority than Nobel Prize winner and Columbia University economist Robert Mundell, a principal contributor to the creation of the euro, says that ending the Bush tax cuts — as proposed by presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama — would cause "a big recession, a nosedive."
In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Mundell said, "the most important thing that could be done with respect to tax rates is to make the Bush tax cuts permanent." Mundell, a recognized expert in many areas of economics including the theory that low taxes stimulate an economy, was also involved in the Reagan tax-cut revolution.
Abruptly raising taxes could be "lethal," according to Mundell. "This would be devastating to the world economy, to the United States, and it would be, I think, political suicide," says Mundell.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalledger.com ...
Link to original WSJ article, interview with Mundell.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121400327981993375.html
“Democratic nominee Barack Obama regularly professes disdain for the Bush tax cuts, suggesting that those growth-spurring measures may be scrapped. “If that happens,” Mr. Mundell predicts, “the U.S. will go into a big recession, a nosedive.”
One of the original “supply-side” economists, he has long preached the link between tax rates and economic growth. “It’s a lethal thing to suddenly raise taxes,” he explains. “This would be devastating to the world economy, to the United States, and it would be, I think, political suicide” in a general election.”
All of the answers I’ve heard out of Obama regarding taxes have revealed him to be just a huge dumbass,
and a Marxist.
To him, it didn’t matter what the results or effects of his tax policy would be, it was “simply a matter of fairness” - that was his throw-away line.
True. And I'm no fan of the current GOP Noodles, but if they're smart (big "if"), they'll keep their powder dry until after Ears gets the nom.
Otherwise, if they do it now, it may weaken him enough to bring back Thunder Thighs.
The great thing about Obama is that he will be ineffectual. His intellectual vacuum is so deep, anything he tries is destined to fail, sinking the Dems with him.
Hope he doesn’t get the chance. McCain is 50% awful, Obama is 95% awful.
If Obama gets elected, I’m going to serve notice to any of his supporters that I know; that they are my enemies and a threat to my freedom, security and prosperity.
The reason Clinton got away with his tax increase was the economy was booming along. Raising taxes in the middle of a recession is the kiss of death.
Really? I have yet to see the 5% non-awful part.
I’ve an inlaw that I consider to be just what you describe.
In commenting on Obama, she stated that she “thinks he has the energy to make us all less selfish”.
Wow... and just what does that mean, deary?
No... Obama supporters aren’t totalitarian fascists/socialists... no... couldn’t happen here - that only happens in places like the Soviet Union.
The last President that inherited a recession and implemented an economic plan like Obama proposes - increased taxes and implement trade restrictions - was none other than Herbert Hoover. We all know how well that turned out.
Instead of wide screen TV's, Wal-Mart will be selling "pots to piss in" because no one will have one..
Who are these Re...pub...li...cans of which you speak?
Let's hope he's right about the political suicide part, at any rate.
The big problem is that the political suicide won't be the "hang yourself in your garage" type. It will be "strap on the C-4 vest and see what you can destroy with yourself" type of suicide.
I doubt Obama took any of Dr. Mundell’s classes at Columbia.
Yes, he has the ammunition, but remember McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts. Of course that coincides with his self-admitted lack of knowledge about economics. I have my doubts about McCain's ability to phrase the arguments correctly.
Even better. Riots in the streets of Denver here we come.
The real question is what dictionary Obama uses when he says “fairness”. In what sense is 50% of the people paying nothing and 1% of the people paying 40% of the total “fair” ? In what other area besides taxation would such a formula equate to “fairness” ?
If his concern was “fairness” without regard to the effects of the policy, he’d be a flat-taxer. A 10% rate without any exemptions, credits, or deductions would raise the same revenue. Sure the “poor” would actually have to pay some taxes finally, but if his concern was “fairness” that wouldn’t matter.
I’m going to assume Mr. Mundell was not invited to today’s economic meeting where they are attempting to define “obamanomics”?
No new taxes, Obamanation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.