Ideals Versus Realities (Thomas Sowell)

Creators Syndicate ^ | July 27, 2011 | Thomas Sowell

[jazusamo]

Many of us never thought that the Republicans would hold tough long enough to get President Obama and the Democrats to agree to a budget deal that does not include raising income tax rates. But they did — and Speaker of the House John Boehner no doubt desires much of the credit for that. Despite the widespread notion that raising tax rates automatically means collecting more revenue for the government, history says otherwise. As far back as the 1920s, Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon pointed out that the government received a very similar amount of revenue from high-income earners at low tax rates as it did at tax rates several times as high. How was that possible? Because high tax rates drive investors into tax shelters, such as tax-exempt bonds. Today, as a result of globalization and electronic transfers of money, "the rich" are even less likely to stand still and be sheared like sheep, when they can easily send their money overseas, to places where tax rates are lower. Money sent overseas creates jobs overseas — and American workers cannot transfer themselves overseas to get those jobs as readily as investors can send their money there. All the overheated political rhetoric about needing to tax "millionaires and billionaires" is not about bringing in more revenue to the government. It is about bringing in more votes for politicians who stir up class warfare with rhetoric. Now that the Republicans seem to have gotten the Democrats off their higher taxes kick, the question is whether a minority of the House Republicans will refuse to pass the Boehner legislation that could lead to a deal that will spare the country a major economic disruption and spare the Republicans from losing the 2012 elections by being blamed — rightly or wrongly — for the disruptions. Is the Boehner legislation the best legislation possible? Of course not! You don't get your heart's desire when you control only one house of Congress and face a presidential veto. The most basic fact of life is that we can make our choices only among the alternatives actually available. It is not idealism to ignore the limits of one's power. Nor is it selling out one's principles to recognize those limits at a given time and place, and get the best deal possible under those conditions. That still leaves the option of working toward getting a better deal later, when the odds are more in your favor. There would not be a United States of America today if George Washington's army had not retreated and retreated and retreated, in the face of an overwhelmingly more powerful British military force bent on annihilating Washington's troops. Later, when the conditions were right for attack, General Washington attacked. But he would have had nothing to attack with if he had wasted his troops in battles that would have wiped them out. Similar principles apply in politics. As Edmund Burke said, more than two centuries ago: "Preserving my principles unshaken, I reserve my activity for rational endeavors." What does "rational" mean? At its most basic, it means an ability to make a ratio, as with "rational numbers" in mathematics. More broadly, it means an ability to weigh one thing against another. There are a lot of things to weigh against each other, not only as regards the economy, but also what the consequences to this nation would be to have Barack Obama get re-elected and go further down the dangerous path he has put us on, at home and abroad. Is it worth that risk to make a futile symbolic vote in Congress? One of the good things about the Tea Party movement is that it resisted the temptation to actually form a third political party, which has been an exercise in futility, time and time again, under the American electoral system. But, if the Tea Party movement within the Republican Party becomes just a rule-or-ruin minority, then they might just as well have formed a separate third party and gone on to oblivion. Writers can advocate things that have no chance at the moment, for their very writing about those things persuasively can make them possible at some future date. But to adopt the same approach as an elected member of Congress risks losing both the present and the future.

[jazusamo]

*PING*
Thomas Sowell

Recent columns
Obama’s ‘Balanced’ Approach
Debt-Ceiling Chicken
Tax Cutters JFK and Reagan Were Not Zero-Sum Thinkers

Please FReepmail me if you would like to be added to or removed from the Thomas Sowell ping list…

[PieterCasparzen]

If no agreement is reached, cuts must ensue.

Obama will be deciding what is cut.

And he will be infuriating people as he cuts.

So his and the Democrats bluff, is just that - a bluff.

They will speak in the media and blame every ounce of pain on Republicans, Conservatives and the Tea Party.

But come November 2012, it will be a housecleaning like no other, after a year of economic pain that will come with downgrades, interest rate hikes, the Federal government slowing on payments to Federal employees, contractors, States, Social Security and medicare.

If your car is out of control and picking up speed, you turn off the road and crash BEFORE you pick up even more speed and the crash is even worse.

we the People need to convince Congress that IT NEEDS TO SPEND ONLY WHAT IT TAKES IN - EVERY SINGLE YEAR; AND IT NEEDS TO START IT’S VERY FIRST CUTS IN BLOATED GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS by cutting government functions in 2012 along the lines of this list:

_________________________________________________________________________

Education__________________ $129.8 billion
Transportation (I propose
a limit of $10 billion)_________ $84.5 billion
Basic research______________ $18.7 billion
Agriculture, forestry
, fishing and hunting _________ $32.8 billion
Fuel and energy_____________ $26.9 billion
Pollution abatement_________ $10.9 billion
Protection of biodiversity
and landscape_______________ $13.9 billion
Housing development_______ $35.5 billion
Community development_____ $25.7 billion
Recreational and
sporting services_____________ $4.1 billion
General Government
(I propose cutting the
current amount in half)_______ $16.6 billion
Welfare (eliminate)_________ $495.0 billion
Grants to States
for Medicaid________________ $276.2 billion
R & D Health
(includes NIH)______________ $36.1 billion

Total reduction to annual
spending_________________ $1,206.7 billion
_________________________________________________________________________

[Tzimisce]

The problem is after 2 years of unchecked liberal rule, there’s no room left to compromise.

Someone is now going to take the hit.

[Psalm 144]

“But, if the Tea Party movement within the Republican Party becomes just a rule-or-ruin minority, then they might just as well have formed a separate third party and gone on to oblivion.”

It is not the Tea Party which is headed for oblivion.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

after 2 years of unchecked liberal rule...

Two years!?

Didn't the RATS take over both Houses of Congress in 2006?

[secret garden]

Sowell’s right. It’s not about abandoning principles, it’s about doing what you can, when you can, without hurting your future chances.

[rhombus]

And the GOP came so close to taking the Senate in 2010. If the GOP now controlled Harry Reid’s positoion, bills would not be tabled. Long ball or Pickett’s Charge?

[ROCKLOBSTER]

Cut?

Why not totally eliminate every one of those categories except transportation and block grants to states for MediCaid?

[jazusamo]

We’ve got to work hard to take back the WH and the Senate to undo what Obama, Reid and the leftists have done the last 5 or so years.

[tet68]

God bless Thomas Sowell.
Bump

[newzjunkey]

Sowell’s right. It’s not about abandoning principles, it’s about doing what you can, when you can, without hurting your future chances.

Needs repeating. Bravo to Thomas Sowell for speaking out.

The people with long knives out for Boehner and House Republicans today have made these people deliriously happy today:

[newzjunkey]

They did. In theory W was a “check” on liberal rule.

[San Jacinto]

Obama has destroyed the economy. It is not going to get better next year. Nothing is going to change those two facts.

If Boehner’s plan does not pass and the debt limit is not raised, then the dims and the media are going to spend the next 15 months pinning that on the “Tea Party” Republicans. Blame for the failing economy will pass from Obama to conservatives. I know they can do it because I’ve seen it work before—Hurricane Katrina, 2008 market collapse, Abu Grahib, etc.—Bush’s Fault.

Hello to Four more years of Obama and Speaker of the House Pelosi. Goodbye to the very slim remaining chance of pulling out of permanent economic collapse from crushing debt.

Consider 2 things—
1. In order to get $1.2 trillion in spending cuts in one year as you suggest, what do you think the make up of Congress would have to be? 225 “conservatives” in the House, 61 “conservatives” in the Senate?
2. What do you think is the best way to get there?

[grey_whiskers]

44 million people are NOW on food stamps. They won't suddenly retroactively blame the 2010 GOP Congress, no matter how much PMSNBC and John Stewart tell them to.

Ditto for the people whose 99 weeks of unemployment has ALREADY run out; and the oil workers sidelined by Obama's executive orders after the BP oil spill.

Etc. etc. etc.

Propaganda FAIL on your part.

Cheers!

[Clock King]

Later, when the conditions were right for attack, General Washington attacked.

Sowell is generally right, but I think he's missing something. When will we ever get a chance to attack again? And why is now NOT the time to attack? Plus don't forget, Washington lost many battles for 5 years before finally winning.

[shield]

He just makes great sense...one of the great common sense men. He is exactly right.

[Sola Veritas]

“The most basic fact of life is that we can make our choices only among the alternatives actually available. It is not idealism to ignore the limits of one’s power. Nor is it selling out one’s principles to recognize those limits at a given time and place, and get the best deal possible under those conditions.”

Finally, an article by an adult.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

I know.

Were there any theoretical vetoes?

[familyop]

The reality is that as the default process goes far enough and takes out enough of the government-linked trash, laid off, government-linked trash won’t have much political power, either. True conservatives—private interests—will get what they want anyway. Time is on our side.