Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No, Government Spending Isn't 'Zero Cost'
Townhall.com ^ | September 29, 2021 | Ben Shapiro

Posted on 09/29/2021 5:56:02 AM PDT by Kaslin

This week, resident Joe Biden made the incredible statement -- sycophantically repeated by the press -- that his $3.5 trillion budget bill, which includes major spending initiatives on everything from climate change to Medicare, would be "free." Biden tweeted, "My Build Back Better Agenda costs zero dollars. Instead of wasting money on tax breaks, loopholes, and tax evasion for big corporations and the wealthy, we can make a once-in-a-generation investment in working America."

This asinine notion immediately rocketed around the political sphere. White House press secretary Jen Psaki explained, "The reconciliation package will cost zero dollars." Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., said, "This is a zero-dollar bill because it's all going to be paid for with taxes on the wealthiest corporations and the wealthiest individuals, which makes it more popular than it even was before." Members of the media began repeating the line ad nauseum. The reason was obvious: Democrats are trying to cudgel Republicans into acquiescing.

Putting aside the contention that Biden's bill would be paid for through tax increases -- a doubtful proposition, given that the Democrats have been playing accounting games by extending particular allowances for just a handful of years, or backloading new costs until years down the road -- the baseline notion that government spending is zero-cost so long as it doesn't take on new debt is bonkers. It's the equivalent of arguing that so long as someone pays for a cocaine-fueled gambling binge in Vegas in cash, the experience has been cost-free.

Biden, however, goes even further. In his addled brain, allowing taxpayers to retain their own money is "wasting money"; spending trillions of dollars on social programs that pervert market incentives and often achieve the precise opposite of their stated intentions is an "investment." Such a designation divests language of meaning. If you steal my wallet and find $100 inside, proceed to inform me that giving me back $20 would be "wasting money," snidely notify me that you will be "investing" in a steak dinner for yourself and then cap your performance by stating that the dinner is "zero-cost," you would deserve a rather thorough thrashing. Do it in the context of national politics, however, and the media will cheer.

All of this is predicated on a lie: that the state is the ultimate source of property and wealth. If that were true, the state would certainly have every ability to maximize its own power by shifting that property around to political allies. In fact, this is precisely what Thomas Hobbes argued in "Leviathan": that the sovereign was the ultimate arbiter of property, as the ultimate repository of force.

The American system was founded in direct opposition to this idea. As James Madison wrote, "Government is instituted to protect property of every sort ... This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own." Madison added, "That is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has in his personal safety and personal liberty, is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest."

Biden would call just such sorts of arbitrary seizures "investments." After all, they're free. To Biden, such language seems natural: he is a career-long ward of the state, on the taxpayer dole every year of his life since the age of 29 -- the only exceptions being the years between his vice presidency and his presidency, when he was giving speeches and writing books about his government years while allegedly avoiding half a million dollars in taxes. To him, taxpayer dollars areBiden, however, goes even further. In his addled brain, allowing taxpayers to retain their own money is "wasting money"; spending trillions of dollars on social programs that pervert market incentives and often achieve the precise opposite of their stated intentions is an "investment." Such a designation divests language of meaning. If you steal my wallet and find $100 inside, proceed to inform me that giving me back $20 would be "wasting money," snidely notify me that you will be "investing" in a steak dinner for yourself and then cap your performance by stating that the dinner is "zero-cost," you would deserve a rather thorough thrashing. Do it in the context of national politics, however, and the media will cheer.

All of this is predicated on a lie: that the state is the ultimate source of property and wealth. If that were true, the state would certainly have every ability to maximize its own power by shifting that property around to political allies. In fact, this is precisely what Thomas Hobbes argued in "Leviathan": that the sovereign was the ultimate arbiter of property, as the ultimate repository of force.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: benshapiro; builtbackbetter; joebiden; spendingbill
More in the link
1 posted on 09/29/2021 5:56:02 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

That Jayapal looks like an alien freak.


2 posted on 09/29/2021 5:59:35 AM PDT by HighSierra5 (The only way you know a commie is lying is when they open their pieholes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

As James Madison wrote, “Government is instituted to protect property of every sort ... This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.” Madison added, “That is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has in his personal safety and personal liberty, is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Today Madison would be considered a domestic terrorist.

These are the same people who believe men can be women, so of course spending trillions can be zero dollars.


3 posted on 09/29/2021 6:03:47 AM PDT by Lurkinanloomin ( (Natural born citizens are born here of citizen parents)(Know Islam, No Peace-No Islam, Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

What is expressed here has been the Democrat perspective for my entire life.

The Democrats have always viewed all wealth as government property and only with condescension would grudgingly allow “tax breaks” to those actually footing the bill.

It is a sign of the depravity of the nation that this wins elections.


4 posted on 09/29/2021 6:13:09 AM PDT by Empire_of_Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

This is communism plain and simple. The government owns everything.


5 posted on 09/29/2021 6:22:02 AM PDT by EastTexasTraveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“”””This is a zero-dollar bill because it’s all going to be paid for with taxes on the wealthiest corporations and the wealthiest individuals, which makes it more popular than it even was before.””””


How about the following novel idea for the Democrats to put into law.

Namely, why don’t the Democrats first pass a law raising the taxes on these wealthiest corporations and individuals? When these new tax dollars come flowing into Washington DC, then Congress can decide where to spend that new money.

We need to get away from the ‘spend first’ and ‘tax later’ mental disease pandemic in Washington DC.

Come on DC politicians, I dare you to tax first and spend later.

I want to see how quickly the politicians are voted out of office.


6 posted on 09/29/2021 6:45:33 AM PDT by Presbyterian Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
The reason was obvious: Democrats are trying to cudgel Republicans into acquiescing.

That’s usually enough to get Graham and Romney to support it.

7 posted on 09/29/2021 6:48:16 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ([CTRL]-[GALT]-[DELETE])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Econ 101… government spending directly or indirectly comes from the pockets of taxpayers reducing disposable income and consumer spending thus reducing GDP. John Maynard Keynes had to invent a multiplier effect to justify his theory that government spending can increase GDP…somehow a dollar spent by the government impacts the economy at greater than a dollar. This has been shown to be false e.g. Obama’s nearly $1trillion stimulus spending was predicted to have a multiplier of over 40%..GDP growth post stimulus was nearly flat.

Biden like most liberals assumes that taxing corporations has no impact on consumer prices. The truth is that higher taxes on corporations just get passed on as higher prices. Taxing “the rich” assumes that wealthy people just have vaults of money they roll around in and they can easily pay higher taxes. The rich however are smart and invest their money in the economy. Even what we see as extravagant spending by the rich also impacts the economy. Those multi million dollar yachts provide jobs for those who build, maintain and crew them. Who gets the money the wealthy spend in high end restaurants?…the business and the people it employs to prepare and serve the food and even the people clearing tables and washing dishes. Economies where the government owns the means of production and even employs the workers … i.e. communist and socialist economies have always been failures so bad that people will risk their lives to escape from them.


8 posted on 09/29/2021 6:59:31 AM PDT by The Great RJ ("Socialists are happy until they run out of people's money." Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Great RJ

Could you rephrase that into a one-liner. The dumb masses do not have the attention span for such a looong explanation.
Thanks.


9 posted on 09/29/2021 7:09:15 AM PDT by griswold3 (When chaos serves the State, the State will encourage chaos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Not reporters but propagandists


10 posted on 09/29/2021 7:29:48 AM PDT by ActresponsiblyinVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Had some interesting discussions, especially when alcohol was in use, over the years with folks who blamed politicians for the nation's troubles... IMO, Biden etc. are not the disease; they are the symptom. The disease is the moral rot in the majority that elects these equivalents to egg-sucking dogs. As a result, Biden etc. get fat whilst lying and making up non sequiturs such as government spending "costs zero dollars".

The sure-enough causes of this country's mess are the cretins with a Biden etc. sign in their front yard.

11 posted on 09/29/2021 7:53:02 AM PDT by PerConPat (A politician is an animal which can sit on a fence and yet keep both ears to the ground - Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Well, sure! It doesn’t cost DC politicians a cent!

However, tax breaks (for tax PAYERS) deprive those politicians, and thus - COST $$$.

Simple politician speak.

And BOY, is Plugs simple!..


12 posted on 09/29/2021 7:58:57 AM PDT by joethedrummer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Since Biden says it is, there is no reason to raise the debt ceiling.


13 posted on 09/30/2021 5:34:56 AM PDT by cableguymn (We need a redneck in the white house.... But the fact checkers said thein story was false!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson