The economy is in the best shape it's been probably since before I was born and we're on track for a trillion dollar deficit. And you want to increase that? Double it? Triple it? Really?
I don't disagree with you at all that tax cuts have to be married with spending cuts. But that's not happening. How about Congress show that they can reign in spending before reducing revenue even more?
“The economy is in the best shape it’s been probably since before I was born and we’re on track for a trillion dollar deficit. And you want to increase that? Double it? Triple it? Really?”
There are four basic ways that the government can redistribute private sector wealth: 1) taxation. 2) debt. 3) currency devaluation, and 4) regulation.
Taxation may be the most direct and “honest” way, but it’s no better or worse than the other three ways. Regulation is the least direct way, because instead of spending, the government uses law to force the private sector to spend or otherwise subsidize according to its redistributive agenda. Currency devaluation is the least honest form of government wealth redistribution because most private citizens aren’t even aware of how it happens.
The best way to compare these various policy options is to think of them all as taxes, because they are. They all “tax” the private sector equally, because none of them are causes of a problem, they are simply alternative effects of the same problem: excessive government redistribution of wealth.
So, if excessive taxation is no better or worse than deficit spending, why bother cutting taxes?
Well, first of all, since taxation is the most “honest” and “straightforward” way the government has of funding it’s redistributive agenda, we have been programmed to view raising taxes as “responsible” and cutting taxes as “irresponsible”. But this is a false choice.
I’ll use the dog poop analogy:
1) Dogs poop on the sidewalk all the time and all that poop needs to be picked up or people will step in it, and that is bad. Think of the dog poop as government spending. Think of people picking it up as paying their taxes. Think of everyone picking up dog shit whenever they see it, and the resulting clean sidewalks, as a balanced budget. Think of any dog poop not picked up as being the deficit. Obviously, the deficit is bad and the balanced budget is good. Why would anyone argue for the deficit, i.e., leaving dog poop on the sidewalk that people might step in?
2) But wait a minute - I don’t even own a dog, why should I pick up your dog’s poop? Think of my refusal to pick up dog poop as me demanding a tax cut.
3) An objective observer might observe that if some of us refuse to pick up dog poop when we see it, there will be dog poop left on the sidewalk, and that is bad. That same observer might see me walk right by a dog poop and accuse me of selfishly leaving it there for someone else to step in, i.e., they might accuse me of demanding a tax cut even though it results in a deficit. They might ask me why I would knowingly cause a deficit when I could balance the budget by just bending over and paying my taxes.
4) Of course, the real solution is for dog owners to pick up their own dog’s poop. Non dog owners should not be presented with the false choice of having to either pick up other people’s poop or endure (and share the blame for) poopy sidewalks.
When you ask me if I care that cutting taxes will cause a deficit - you are offering me a false choice every bit as unfair as the dog poop choice.
Sure, I could just pay the taxes and avoid the deficits, just as I could just bend over and pick up other people’s dog poop and have clean sidewalks. But all that does is mask the real problem and enable those responsible for it to escape responsibility. If you clean up other people’s messes for them you are enabling their bad behavior by avoiding a needed confrontation.
So no, I don’t want dog poop on the sidewalk, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to bend over and pick up other people’s dog poop when I don’t even have a dog. I’ll be happy to clean up my share of bird shit or bear shit or coyote shit when I see it, because that is the result of nature and therefore a shared problem - not the direct result of lifestyle choices that individuals make, such as the decision to own a dog.
Cut the taxes now, and when deficits go up we’ll have to have a confrontation with Leftists about whose fault that is. We shouldn’t keep putting off that confrontation by taxing EVERYONE to cover the irresponsible spending of Leftists.
By the way, I can anticipate a legitimate argument: what about a safety net for the poor? What about roads, bridges and other infrastructure? What about law enforcement and national defense? Isn’t there government spending that is for the commen good, and for which we should all pay our share of taxes?
Yes, of course. And as I said, I’m happy to clean up my share of bird shit, bear shit or coyote shit. But we are way, way, way, way past that legitimate level of wealth redistribution that is for the common good. The federal government is twenty or thirty times the size it needs to be in order to serve its limited roles as enumerated in the Constitution.
We need to continue to cut taxes and force the conversation to turn to the obvious elephant in the room: massively bloated government. Then as we reign back the government, this will force the conversation to the next elephant in the room: guns vs butter, i.e., what is the proper scope and role of the government per the constitution? We need to confront these questions, not avoid them by dutifully letting ourselves be guilted into bending over and paying our taxes like a bunch of schmucks.
Spending cuts where? Medicare and Medicaid, Social Security, Defense spending, and interest on the debt take up 83% of federal spending. You could cut everything else but those and we would still have a deficit.
Republicans always like to talk about being fiscally responsible but they are just as bad as democrats. All they ever talk about is cutting taxes. Under Bush Jr not only did we cut taxes we increased spending!
We did not need a tax cut, we do not need another tax cut. If the American people want these programs then the conservative thing to do is to pay for them, not continue to go into debt.
I believe that the deficit and the debt poses the most danger to our countries future well being, and having two teenagers means I want to see it taken care of. I don’t care if that is through raising revenue(i.e tax increases, tariffs, etc.), cutting government programs, or a combination of the two. But there is no party that will speak this truth to Americans.