Lower Taxes+More Spending? Seems Familiar…

January 11th, 2009 By: Michael Merritt | Tags:

Hello, all!  I am back from a week in New York, where the trade show my company put on went very smoothly.  I had an enjoyable time, marred by the near explosion of my head as I listened to two liberals fawn over Barack Obama and the organics aisle of the supermarket the whole train ride home.  Anyway, it’s good to be back, and I must start with where I part most from the president-elect’s platform: the economy.

It seems like we’re in for more of the same, in terms of taxes and spending, anyway.  As Michael noted the other day, Obama has warned of an increase in the deficit for years to come.  He is also apparently planning to push for round of tax cuts.

More spending coupled with tax cuts?  Hang on, didn’t we just have eight years of this?

Of course, little of this comes as a surprise to me.  I paid attention to the campaign, and saw him talk about all of this then.  Doesn’t mean I have to like it.

I never understand the “cut taxes and spend anyway” attitude of the Republicans over the past eight years, and it doesn’t make sense to me now with Obama and the Democrats.  I understand their reasoning: Obama feels it’s his duty to step in and fix things.  It’s here that he and George Bush do not stray far from one another.  Bush made this abundantly clear recently when he said that he had to “abandon free market principles to save the free-market system.”  Obama also clearly feels the same way with his support for the auto industry bailout.

The trouble is that while this may work for today’s problems, it opens a load of problems for years down the road.  Obama’s hope might be that less taxes would actually increase revenue.  But if it doesn’t, spending would have to be cut across the board and taxes raised higher than spending in order to pay for all the debt.  And not for a short time, either, but for years.  To be honest, though, can anybody actually ever see all the debt being paid off?  Not me.

So, yet again, future generations are being saddled with the debt from past generations.  People like me will be expected to pay higher taxes to pay off the bailouts from today.  Well, not really, since taxes are being lowered, see?  But without a decrease in spending, deficits are increased, and the debt built up even more.

I might be more enthusiastic about people getting more money in their paychecks if it was going to stimulate the economy.  But, like last time, people will probably use it to pay off their own debt.  Meanwhile, the deficits rise.

If Obama was smart, when most of this economic crisis was over (assuming it is during his term), he’d immediately cut spending.  But this isn’t likely to happen with his plans for healthcare and other social programs.  And he’s still likely to support middle class tax cuts.

You can see how this issue just keeps snowballing.

Thus, the only way I can see some progress on fiscal responsibility is if the economic conservatives gain a foothold in 2010 in order to slow down the Democrats.  That is, if there are any of them who can win then.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.