Tag: deficits

–America, wake up

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology.

“Congress to Weigh Options for Reducing Federal Debt

Hard choices on Social Security, Medicare, defense and taxes can’t be avoided much longer. By Richard DeKaser, Contributing Economist, The Kiplinger Letter
July 30, 2010

Is Washington serious about tackling the federal debt? […] The key is Obama’s debt commission. Its short-term mission is to balance the budget by 2015 — not counting interest on the swelling national debt. That would slash the annual deficits by two-thirds, to about $500 billion. The long-term goal: Achieve fiscal sustainability, which is generally seen as holding debt at something under the equivalent of 65% of gross domestic product (GDP).”

Let’s get this straight. With a balanced budget, even minuscule inflation would reduce the amount of real money in the economy. Historically, recessions follow low deficit growth, and recoveries correspond with high deficit growth. So why aim for a balanced budget? No evidence, just anthropomorphic economics disease.

What makes fiscal sustainability 65% of GDP? No evidence. The DEBT/GDP ratio is meaningless – an apples/oranges comparison with zero significance. And where did 65% come from? Nowhere. Just popped into someone’s head. And that “pop” will cost you plenty.

The ignorant article continues:

“Recommendations in four areas are likely:

“Social Security. . . .Gradually raise the retirement age to 68, calculate benefits using the Consumer Price Index instead of wage inflation and shave a half point from annual cost-of-living increases would knock $548 billion off the deficit in 2040, for example. Another possibility is to raise the cap on earnings subject to payroll taxes, perhaps to 90% of earnings for everyone. That would juice up incoming revenue.”

If someone told you they would cut your Social Security payment, would you at least ask, “Why?” And if the answer were, “The government can’t afford it,” would you at least say, “Show me the evidence”? You never have seen any evidence except for unsubstantiated statements that the debt is too big. This is the same answer you have received since 1971. Wrong then; wrong now.

The ignorant article continues:

“Health care. . . apply a means test for Medicare and revise the recently passed health care law.” Yes, we’re going to cut your Medicare payments, reduce your doctors’ payments and require you to prove you need the money. Do you care? Naw. And don’t even bother to prove the government can’t afford the expense. I trust you. Just take my money and reduce the number of doctors. I love pain.

More from the ignorant article:

“Other government spending. . . A full-scale review is already under way, including plans to forgo or scale back big weapons systems — the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the C-17 transport and more. More base closings, especially abroad, are also possible.” Either we need these things for defense or we don’t. Or are you saying the unsupported notion that the government is broke trumps American defense initiatives?

And finally, my favorite ignorant paragraph:

“Taxes. . . rates will surely be raised at some point. Holding them steady for a year — for all but high incomers — costs $95 billion. For 10 years, the tab climbs to $2.46 trillion. Other tax options on the table include limiting itemized deductions and imposing a value-added tax.” Yes, debt hawks, raise my taxes. You don’t provide evidence, but you are much smarter than me, so go ahead, take my money. I don’t care.

The ignorant article continues, “All of the options are extremely painful, and lawmakers’ instincts will be to balk and refuse to budge.” And with darn good reason, because these options not only are painful, but are incredibly harmful and foolish.

America, wake up. These fools want to steal your money, your health, your defense and your lifestyle. Don’t let them do it. Demand proof they know what they’re talking about. Demand proof the federal deficit and debt are unsustainable. If someone wants to steal from you, vote them out.

Or you can just lie back, spread wide and say, “Take me.”

By the way, my $1000 offer still is unclaimed. I wonder why.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

No nation can tax itself into prosperity

–Debt is bad; debt is good. Take your pick.

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology.

There is no functional difference between a federal tax cut and a federal spending increase. Some might argue that federal spending is superior or inferior to private spending, though evidence for either is slim, and either has the same result. They both increase the amount of federal money in the economy. (Mistakenly called the federal “debt.”)

Further, increasing the federal money supply stimulates the economy, and decreasing the money supply depresses the economy. So it is both laughable and sad to see how debt hawks squirm between wanting a lower debt, higher taxes and lower taxes, along with less federal spending, more spending and improved GDP. As the song says, “Something’s gotta give.”

Here are quotes from the always confused editors of the Chicago Tribune, in the editorial dated 8/1/10, titled “Out of debt.”

“. . . Democrats and Republicans are very good at doing one thing: running up the debt. That’s the reason for the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility . . . to find ways to stem the red ink.” O.K., so federal deficits are bad.

“. . . at this stage (a tax increase) would be a terrible mistake, not only for the health of the economy, but for the nation’s long-term fiscal health.” O.K., so federal deficits are good, in both the short term and in the long term.

“More likely, Congress and the president would spend every nickel (from a tax increase) – and then spend some more.” Oh, oh. Now federal deficits are bad, again.

“Nor does it make sense to place a new (tax) weight on the economy when it is already struggling to grow.” Woops, deficits are good, again.

“Congress can’t afford to indulge the notion that endless borrowing is a sustainable strategy.” So deficits are bad.

“The wisest option is to extend tax cuts for a year . . . “ Deficits are good

“. . . then see what the deficit commissions proposes to curtail our addiction to debt.” Deficits are bad.

“ . . . Erskine Bowles suggests a healthy ratio of $3 dollars in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases . . . it’s essential if we hope to foster lasting prosperity . . . “ Deficits now are awful. Mr. Bowles “scientific” suggestion equals $4 in spending cuts or $4 in tax increases, or anywhere in between. Guarantee: He has zero data to support his 3/1 ratio, but hey, who need facts?

“ . . . while sparing the taxpayers of tomorrow an unsupportable debt burden.” Deficits are bad.

And here is my favorite: “Coupled with spending discipline, revenue measures can be on leg of the journey back to fiscal sanity. But if they are the first and only leg, they will be a fatal detour.” Huh? They are saying spending cuts and tax increases are good, but first we should have spending increases and tax cuts!

All of the above is classic debt hawk double talk. Federal debt is a taxpayer “burden,” but necessary to grow the economy, but “unsupportable,” even though taxpayers don’t pay for federal debt, and the government has the unlimited ability to service its debt.

That kind of muddy thinking is what needlessly has extended this recession and the unemployment that goes with it. Ignorance may be bliss, but it sure is harmful. As the theme at the top of this post reads, “The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology.”

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

No nation can tax itself into prosperity

–Four lessons about Congress and our economy

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology.

What lessons does the following article provide?

7/31/10: (AP) “WASHINGTON (AP) – Tucked into the new health care law is a requirement that could become a paperwork nightmare for nearly 40 million businesses. They must file tax forms for every vendor that sells them more than $600 in goods.

“Business groups say it will swamp their members in paperwork. “This foolish policy hammers our business community when we should be supporting their job growth,” Sen. Mike Johanns of Nebraska said. The requirement would hit about 38 million businesses, charities and tax-exempt organizations, many of them small businesses already swamped by government paperwork . It would also create an avalanche of paperwork that could strain the IRS.

“Republicans want to repeal the filing requirement and pay for it by changing other parts of the new health care law. Democrats want to repeal the filing requirement and pay for it by raising taxes on international corporations and limiting taxpayers’ ability to use special trusts to avoid gifts taxes.”

Four lessons:

#1. Federal taxes represent the single most damaging factor in our economy – far more damaging than bankers’ greed or speculators’ law-breaking. Taxes not only remove massive amounts of money from our economy, but they waste millions of hours for preparation, and enforcement.

#2. Congress does not understand the fundamentals of government finance. Federal taxes do not pay for federal spending, and tax reductions do not need to be “paid for” by increases in other taxes.

#3. Taxing business, while simultaneously trying to stimulate employment, makes no sense. Every tax on business hurts the economy, while increasing unemployment.

#4. Senators and Representatives are far worse than the “greedy” businessmen Congress loves to criticize. Congress’s greed is both for money and for votes. Members of Congress have one concern, and it is not the best interests of America. It is re-election. In that sense, Congresspersons are the least patriotic people in America, often taking actions they know will hurt the country, merely to assure themselves of ongoing personal power. Each day, Congress does more damage to America than have Al Qaeda, the Taliban and oil spills combined.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

No nation can tax itself into prosperity

–Economic disaster: Congress in agreement

The debt hawks are to economics as the creationists are to biology.

By Z. BYRON WOLF ABC News; July 27, 2010; “Debt Commission: Dealing With Federal Debt Likely To Require Tax Hikes, Spending Cuts. On both sides of the aisle, lawmakers are coming to terms with hard political fact: services are going to have to be cut and taxes are going to have to go up to keep the $13 trillion-plus national debt from skyrocketing into infinity and beyond.”

Our leaders have no idea what they are talking about. Cutting services and raising taxes is not a “hard political fact.” These are the absolute worst steps we could take, not just unnecessary, but massively harmful to our economy. The infamous DEBT COMMISSION, whose assignment it is to reduce the economy’s money supply, is akin to a “blood commission,” whose job it is to reduce the blood supply. Money is the lifeblood of an economy.

The same people who complain there are not enough jobs, also want to reduce money creation, the very thing that creates jobs. Our leaders act like doctors, who apply leeches to cure anemia. The country needs lower taxes, not higher. The country needs more federal spending, not less. These politicians, totally ignorant about economics, make economic decisions with the expected result.

And don’t be fooled by statements that taxes only will be increased on the rich. That simply is not true. All taxes destroy money. Period. Destroying any money, whether currently owned by rich or poor, decreases the total money supply, which hurts the entire American economy. You cannot drain water from only one end of a bathtub. A tax on Bill Gates hurts us all. It benefits no one.

And what are the “unnecessary” services that will be cut? See: SERVICES, and decide what we should eliminate — remembering that eliminating any federal spending reduces the money supply.

I cannot express in stronger terms how outrageously harmful this all will be. I urge you to contact your Senators, your Representatives and your media, and tell them to learn economics before making these terrible economic decisions that absolutely, positively will injure us all.

If Congress were employed by Al-Qaeda, they could not hurt America more than they now wish to do. If someone told you, “I have a plan to destroy billions or even trillions of American dollars,” you rightfully would brand him a traitor. More countries die from enemies within than from enemies without.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

No nation can tax itself into prosperity