No doubt it came as a shock to many of you that weatherizing windows couldn’t get a $14 trillion economy cooking again. But if an $800 billion infusion of government and union bailouts failed to spur any decent economic growth, then how is a new “piecemeal” $50 billion stimulus going to work out?
Media reports tell me this is more complex. The president has devised an exhilarating new plan that will not only “jump-start” job creation but also fund and rebuild the “crumbling” infrastructure of the United States in brand new ways.
Have you noticed that the infrastructure is always “crumbling” in news stories and presidential speeches — if less regularly in the real world. To many Democrats, “crumbling” means we’re not subsidizing smart grids and high-speed rail projects fast enough.
For those of you who drive, though, a recent Reason Foundation study measures the condition and cost-effectiveness of roads — including deficient bridges, urban traffic congestion, fatality rates, pavement condition, etc. — and finds that roads haven’t been in better shape at any time in the past 19 years.
Then again, free-market nihilists are always daydreaming about bridges collapsing on innocent Americans — if at all possible, poor and disabled Americans.
We should concede the highway system has been mismanaged by government and could always use more efficient funding. But creating a system wherein Washington dictates spending dollars is hardly a brilliant new plan. It’s the same plan this administration has for funding public schools, student loans, mortgages, health care insurance, and energy, among other knickknacks. Which is to say centrally and with progressive ethical strings tightly attached.
[…]
During Labor Day weekend, I caught a number of local Democratic candidates calling themselves tax cutters in ads. Yet, nearly all of the tax cuts Americans have seen the past year and a half advance some liberal moral or social good. The overriding goal of the stimuli and tax breaks — from the things we build to the jobs we save to the tax credits we get — is to pick economic winners, steer us in the right direction and wheedle citizens to be good boys and girls.
To offer comprehensive, amoral cuts would be to admit ideological defeat. To allow them to work would mean a long-term disaster for Obama and the type of Democrats who now inhabit Congress.
This president would never surrender to such indignity.
It’s good to be the King.
— that is, unless you’ve assumed the role of a latter day Louis XVI, and your wife is caught lounging around castles, muttering about the carping proles, “Qu’ils mangent de la arugula.”
At which point, it would have been a good idea to have studied your history a little more thoroughly.
The overriding goal of the stimuli and tax breaks — from the things we build to the jobs we save to the tax credits we get — is to pick economic winners, steer us in the right direction and wheedle citizens to be good boys and girls.
There’s a whole contingent of peoples on your blog today arguing in favor of these sort of tax code-based social engineerings for to help the homeownings, and they say that if you disagree you’re a statist.
I don’t get it at all it confuzzles my brain.
Spending on infrastructure to pull “the economy” out of this crisis – it’s dumb. Suppose you’re broke and almost bankrupt. How are you helped by borrowing more money to remodel your bathroom? It’s just dumb. Totally.
Well ‘feets, your assumption that the small amount of their own money that homeowners get to keep via the mortgage interest deduction somehow belongs to someone else might create that impression.
then we are pro using the tax code for good-doggy type social engineerings.
Just to be clear.
Viva la Boehnerfag Revolution.
Of course, my support for making medical expenses, all medical expenses, fully tax deductible is also “social engineerings”, I reckon…
As someone who spends an inordinate amount of time on the roadways, the idea that the infrastructure is crumbling does not really pan out in real world experience. Except in Chicago. Their roads suck.
How’s this idea “feets: let’s ban home mortgages altogether, since those middle class fuckers who bought houses on credit are “responsible” for the economic mess we’re in. If someone cannot afford to pay cash for a house, he doesn’t fucking deserve one.
Same goes for cars, too.
I am cool with going all liquid, Spiny ;-)
Comment by Spiny Norman on 9/8 @ 10:15 am #
How’s this idea “feets: let’s ban home mortgages altogether, since those middle class fuckers who bought houses on credit are “responsible” for the economic mess we’re in. If someone cannot afford to pay cash for a house, he doesn’t fucking deserve one.
Great idea, but with a wrinkle: only if the renters lose their voting rights.
I still like ideas that include freedom to make contracts between willing contract makers. So centrally determined bans of mortgage making doesn’t sound so hot, all things taken in all. Seems to me like the relevant questions of the meaning of self-government have gotten lost in a whose ox gored shuffle.
You guys DO realize that was sarcasm.
sarcasm like a fox
The mortgage interest deduction is one of the very few the middle class has left, and Barry’s goons want to take it away. What’s next, the deduction for dependents?
(Yes, ‘feets, we singles are “subsidizing” the breeders…)
Spiny, I think it’s worth distinguishing between those who want to take away the deduction to raise taxes (bad guys) and those who don’t like deductions as a proper or harm-free method of tax reduction (good guys).
Remember that idea of being able to do your tax return on a postcard? Or the Fair Tax? These all scrap deductions across the board and instead keep the focus on actual tax deductions regardless of what you freely decide to do with your money.
focus on actual tax reductions regardless
bh,
Oh, don’t get me wrong, I’d prefer a Flat Tax, somewhere around 10%-12% would be reasonable, but it will never happen. Almost 50% of the US adult population pay no federal income tax. Imagine the OUTRAGE that would ensue should they be asked to pay now.
The “Fair Tax” scheme being bandied about that contains a “VAT” is a monumental boondoggle waiting to happen. The Value Added Tax they have in Europe is the most corruption-stained tax that has ever been created.
I’m not sure if it’s possible or not, Spiny. Ted Kennedy’s seat and all that. But, it’s worth constantly recognizing that governmental attempts to control behavior with all these carrots and sticks is wrong. So, maybe we can only get rid of 60% of the meddling rather than 100%. It’ll still only be possible to the degree that we can make the case for good ideas and against bad ideas.
The only problem with “getting rid of 60% of the meddling”, bh, is that historically, every time Congress “reforms” the Tax Code, the middle class gets screwed, for little actual benefit.
That is because there are too few voices arguing against improper reforms, Spiny. If we won’t put the case forward, we can be sure it won’t carry the day.
There was a time when it seemed all gun control was headed the wrong direction. Then our advocates worked tirelessly and turned the tide.
Myself, I’m not ready to give up on actual tax reform yet.
Myself, I’m not ready to give up on actual tax reform yet.
The problem with reform is that the goal is to clean-up waste and fraud. And we’re expecting/asking politicians to spearhead this?
Is like asking a thief to please not steal your stuff.
it is what they do.
They steal, so they can have.
Well, we’ve never had a single win on entitlement reform either. Should we tell Paul Ryan to stuff it like the GOP leadership has?
Not me.
(Btw, I am extremely sympathetic to a skeptical view on this. There might well need to be structural reform to change any of these things.)
What if there was a brief moment when the fates were smiling and we missed it because we were too discouraged from past failures?
I don’t like the idea of such modest goals at a time when Obama and the Dems have severely pissed off the populace with the exact opposite of our goals.
Compare and contrast our visions. Let us earn the true mandate that Obama forfeited with his campaign lies.
The Value Added Tax they have in Europe is the most corruption-stained tax that has ever been created.
Spiny, it is estimated that VAT fraud in the EU is on the order of €60bn – €100bn per annum. That’s almost real money (not to Kaptain Kickass, obviously, but to the rest of us). You’ll love the stuff in this document, e.g:
You guys can get in on the ground level! Think of the opportunities!
People will go to alternate markets if the legal ones are highly distorted? Get outta here!
Should I assume that doesn’t include all the legal exemptions that have been handed out like party favors to “protected industries”?
Should I assume that doesn’t include all the legal exemptions that have been handed out like party favors to “protected industries”?
Yes, that’s your garden variety, Chicago-style fraud. The exemptions are in a nether world all their own.
So I suppose this isn’t a good time to suggest we examine the characteristics of the people we choose to represent us and look to alter our own criteria (so alter ourselves, so to speak, since that seems to me something we can control rather directly), choosing a better sort of person as representatives? Tried that awhile back and it didn’t seem to meet with much favor.
I was going to mention that and Ric’s idea, sdferr.
Btw, I’m not proposing a VAT tax, in case I was giving that impression.
A flat tax, with no carrots and no sticks, sounds just fine to me.
I don’t mean we shouldn’t try. I just mean the deck is stacked against us.
We’re continually locking the fox in the henhouse.
There is a flaw in the system as it is currently practiced.
Revision: a flat tax, with no carrots and no sticks, that’s paid quarterly without employer withholding.
“There is a flaw in the system as it is currently practiced.”
Then is our chief priority discovering or identifying this flaw? Is it merely a matter of practice and not something structural?
I don’t know if it’s merely a matter of practice. I think it’s structural. A “moral” person in government is fighting with sticks, while the rest are using guns.
The politician that rewards it’s constituents with pork has more power.
Weeding out the morons, one at a time.
I’d prefer a Flat Tax, somewhere around 10%-12%
THIRTEEN PERCENT! Nice prime number, hard to calculate in your head.
Also, I’m in favor of the mortgage deduction because I personally benefit from it. I also don’t see any reason why it shouldn’t stay there—not for social-engineering reasons but because the gubmint isn’t entitled to any more of my money.
Not one red cent.
What’s the fastest, cheapest way to get a hold of the funds in my 401K? They’re going to start grabbing those any time now: first a nibble, then outright seizure.
Weeding out the morons, one at a time.
Sweet, dude.
Have they NOT sucked at any point in the last three decades (probably more, but that’s as long as I’ve been paying attention)?
draws a six-figure salary
Linkified.
Slarti – No, they have always been teh suck. Always. And they pay some of the highest taxes I have seen.
Any reason?
What if rather than having a higher tax rate and being granted a deduction, you simply had a lower tax rate?
As I mentioned up thread, there are two groups here. People who want to take away deductions to increase revenues and people who don’t like the very idea of deductions or tax credits.
We like the mortgage interest deduction. Others like a tax credit for buying a green car. Carrots and sticks are for animals you’re training. Not a free people.
I would like to quit buying a new Ford Ranger for my county every year. I would like to quit buying a new sedan for the federal government every year. Is that too much to ask for?
No shit, huh?
Can you finance your taxes ?!
crist ad redone for truth
link
I’d give all deductions up in excahnge for lower rates – however, we see how well those last, so the deduction is a defense mechanism, I think, for when the Left gets power and has to increase taxes on “the rich” … and we all find ourselves paying more.
Hey, if 10% was good enough for God, why should the Feds get more? Heck, let us borrow from Islam and reduce it to the level paid in zakat…
– I remember back in the early 60’s during Kennedy’s brief rein if you bitched about taxes you tended to get a lecture about it being “the price we pay for the privileges we enjoy as Americans”.
– Later that changed with some bills. particularly at the state level labeled “Right to work laws”.
– The government alays gets to have it both ways. When they want your money sudden;y your rights become privaleges, but when they decide what you “owe” they apply “earned and unearned to your income.
– The deck is always stacked. I would submit you owe nothing. It’s all essentially legal theft.
– We have to accept that we’ll be robbed in order to keep the Republic afloat, we don’t have to accept the fucked up terms they use to justify it.
Zakat is new to me. 2.5%? Wow.
Second look at Sharia?
– Give you another example of the scam rules.
– If they are after you for back taxes they can keep up the pirsuit for ten years before the statute of limitations kicks in.
– If they owe you monies , they are required to send you precisely one non-registered letter, and if you do not ask for it back in writing within two years you lose it. No appeals, no nothing. It’s gone.
– If you have aq child in school, and he or she gets injured, you have a limit of 6 months to file for damages. That’s it. After that you have no appeal. That’s in Cal, it probably varies from state to state, but mot by much.
– Fuckers.
Harsanyi – sounds like a moneychanger.
Is that terribly offensive? Because I think it sounds kinda funny, like a human ATM.