Posted on 09/24/2012 10:31:04 AM PDT by TurboZamboni
National Association for Business Economics recently surveyed say the country needs more fiscal stimulus through 2013, but by 2014 it should be time to throttle back. The reason for the delay: the sluggish nature of the country's economic recovery. A majority of the economists favor extending payroll tax cuts, current marginal income tax rates and current tax rates for dividends and capital gains for most or all taxpayers through 2013. Deep tax cuts that were passed under President George W. Bush expire at the end of December unless Congress takes action. At the center of debate: extending the cuts for everybody. or just households earning less than $250,000 a year.
(Excerpt) Read more at oregonlive.com ...
Yet I guarantee if you added a "sunset provision" on the tax increases they want, these "economists" would oppose that ,too.
While we fight, how about a rule that freezes all departments so that during the interim, no one can spend more than they did last year.
We can’t even start with that...
KEYNESIAN ECONOMISTS PUSH COMMUNIST CENTRAL PLANNING
No one has the guts to call for DEBT reduction. If your goal is mearly a reduction in the growth rate of debt then we are doomed.
Notice the story does not actually give any hard data on this. It merely claims this is what the Economist said. So did the economist actually say this or is this the political spin the Associated Propaganda reporter added on it?
Deficit reduction requires responsible spending, i.e., massive spending cuts - it is impossible to tax at a high enough rate to match Obama’s massive spending binge. Start with Bill Clinton’s last budget, scale it up for population growth and inflation, and then require individual votes on any line item with more spending than the scaled values from Clinton’s last budget. I’d consider even that budget to be too wasteful, but at least it would be a far better starting point than what we have today.
good old baseline budgeting...
I’d like to see the survey, the actual wording of the question(s) asked, and what(if any) options were...was it a 2 option question?
probable highly technical j-school economic survey question:
should we reduce the deficit by:
A) increase taxes (mosty on rich)
B) cut spending
C) do both
The Republicans tried to make that deal with Democrats, Tax increases for spending cuts, but of course the Democrats had no intention of cutting spending, it’s what cost HW his job.
Tax increases will hurt the economy and would be counterproductive to reducing the deficit
The easiest way to reduce the deficits is to get the 25% unemployment back down to 5%.
That will boost government revenues while it cuts government outlays.
No one has the guts to call for DEBT reduction. If your goal is mearly a reduction in the growth rate of debt then we are doomed.
= = =
There’s nothing magic about the Laffer Curve, and nothing you can do to escape its truth.
///
exactly!
we need to cut spending AND cut taxes. back to 19% of GDP at least.
when the last true “Tea Party” president had a recession worse than Obama’s, he fixed it in less than 2 years,
with drastic spending cuts, and LOWER taxes:
-
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/powell-jim4.html
=
America’s Greatest Depression Fighter
=
With Harding’s tax cuts, spending cuts and relatively non-interventionist economic policy, the gross national product rebounded to $74.1 billion in 1922. The number of unemployed fell to 2.8 million – a reported 6.7% of the labor force – in 1922. So, just a year and a half after Harding became president, the Roaring 20s were underway! The unemployment rate continued to decline, reaching a low of 1.8% in 1926 – an extraordinary feat.
Right now you can’t do either.
Too many people without jobs. Too many people dependent on the government tit.
Right now, you unleash the economy. Totally. End nearly all the federal agencies. Right now we need energy, coal production, nuclear, oil, gas, you name it. Remove all federal taxes from corporations and businesses. Get gasoline and diesel down to $1 a gallon. Get factories back to America. Get people working. No more free trade.
This is a great idea, lets phase it in. Phase 1, ten years of spending* cuts. Phase 2, ten more years of spending* cuts. Phase 3, review to see if tax increases are prudent.
*Spending cuts is defined as less money than the year before. This clarification was added due to the fact reductions in rate of increased spending are often mis-labeled as "spending" cuts in Washington, which is not true in any normal, intelligent, reasonable interpretation.
(B) You can't cut spending enough to make a difference. The overwhelming majority of the budget is in entitlements.
(C) Doesn't matter. We've reached the tipping-point. Government-worshippers have got a deadly surprise coming soon: the government is not your friend.
You have to laugh that the same Leftist who say we can reduce smoking by raising cigaret taxes turn around and claim raising income taxes has no economic impact.
These are the Paid off Economist just like the Paid off Journalist, all are puppets of the left with the one refrain Statism uber Alles!
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.