Posts Tagged ‘tax and spend’

Thomas Del Beccaro

Obama’s 6 Worst Policy Decisions

by Thomas Del Beccaro

obama

From Guantanamo to Health Care, Obama is certainly seeking to Change America – or more accurately -to accelerate the pace of change from a private enterprise-freedom based civilization to a Big Government-run society.  According to Thomas Paine, “It is the duty of a patriot to protect his country from his government.”  I realize that is a slightly different definition than Joe Biden would use, but nevertheless, in that light, here is my listing of the worst of his policy decisions:

6. Bailing Out GM.  “His policy of public investments prevented necessary liquidations.  The businesses he hoped thus to save either went bankrupt in the end, after fearful agonies, or were burdened . . . by a crushing load of debt.  [He] undermined property rights . . .pushed federal credit into the banks and bullied them into inflating . . .” Historian Paul Johnson wrote that of Herbert Hoover.  You can almost substitute Obama’s name for Hoover’s  in every detail.   By the way, Government Motors sales are declining at 3 times the rate of the industry as a whole.  Hoover would be proud.

(more…)

Brian Garst

A Value-Added Tax Won’t Solve the Deficit Crisis

by Brian Garst

As Congress prepares to raise the debt ceiling by $1.8 trillion, there are renewed calls from political elites for a value-added tax in America. The New York Times all but campaigned for the idea while touting it as a possible “cure for deficits.” But a VAT would do nothing to solve our deficit problem. Rather, it would supply new fuel to big government bureaucrats addicted to spending.

PT-AK518_jp1MUS_G_20081219183549

Supporters of a VAT mistakenly assume that increasing government revenues will lead to reduced budget deficits. While raising additional revenue may be part of any long term budgetary solution, it is not sufficient by itself – and probably not needed at all. Unless systemic changes are made, there is every reason to believe that additional revenues will simply be used to provide additional entitlements, pork barrel projects, and other wasteful government spending initiatives designed solely to enhance the reelection prospects of politicians. So long as deficit spending provides tangible benefits to the political class, they will continue to run deficits regardless of the amount of revenue raised.

Even in the midst of recession, federal revenues exceeded $2 trillion in fiscal year 2009. Can anyone really argue that $2 trillion is not enough for the federal government to perform the duties outlined in the Constitution?

(more…)

Thomas Del Beccaro

Government Force or Market Forces? – What’s Better for the Job Market . . .

by Thomas Del Beccaro

By all accounts, future job growth is going to be sluggish at best and we can expect double digit unemployment at least through next year.  The Democrats’ response is a $300 billion jobs program.  Many Republicans would rather rely on the private sector to fuel the recovery and job growth.  So what’s better, Government Force or Market Forces?

shell-game

The use of the phrase Government Force is based on the nature of government programs.  The vast majority of the people would prefer to pay little or no taxes.  They are literally forced by government to pay those taxes.  As it relates to a jobs bill, the Democrats will tax one set of people or businesses (taxpayers) and/or borrow money (a delayed tax) and then transfer a portion of those collected/borrowed funds to other people or businesses.  In that manner, the Democrats believe they have created a job – or in today’s vernacular, saved a job.  But have they?

In the process of taxing some and transferring to others, the government force has taken money away from a business/taxpayer in California and perhaps given it to someone in Alabama.  That means the business in California cannot hire someone (or save a job) with the money transferred to Alabama – a type of zero sum game.  Actually, it is worse than a zero sum game because government always manages to waste money in the transfer and so Alabama is never helped so much as California is hurt.

Put another way, in an effort to fill Alabama’s bucket, the government forces the emptying of California’s bucket through tax and spend transfers.  Perhaps that is why Churchill famously said “We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.”

(more…)