Wednesday, December 8, 2010

We can be deficit hawks AND oppose higher taxes

The MSM and the left love to scream hypocrisy at Conservatives, Tea-Partiers, and anyone from the GOP who oppose higher taxes all the while demanding we get serious about lowering the national debt.


But it is really simple, and not hypocritical: we need to lower debt by cutting government spending. Full stop.


Tax increases give sustenance to the spenders; we need to stop feeding that beast - now.


Oh yes, cutting spending in any big way will require a lot of pain and get a lot of people mad - ask Chris Christie. But cutting must be done, and done without any more tax increases.


And sorry President Obama, we're not for "tax cuts for the rich." We're simply against raising taxes for anyone - especially the middle class. Please don't insinuate otherwise, you're just further pissing us off, if that's possible.


Are we for temporary tax cuts like a payroll tax holiday? Yes, as an economic stimulus, which is needed. But given our druthers we'd make the cuts more supply side and offset the tax cuts with spending cuts. How about a 10% wage and benefit cut for Federal employees?


So look, you may not like the spending cuts we favor, but we're not hypocrites - we're debt hawks who oppose higher taxes. Get used to us.


Oh, and even if, for instance, we think Social Security needs to be means tested, we'll still cash the checks until we get that law enacted for everyone. That's not hypocritical either. If you think it is hypocrisy then you ought to be sending in the higher taxes you favor even though that's not in effect either. Else, shut up, hypocrite.

6 comments:

  1. Cut spending on what? Give us details.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Cut spending on what? Give us details....

    Two suggestions above: Federal Pay/Benefits and means testing Social Security. Also, nearly all the spending cut suggestions from the debt commission are good....cut everything that is not essential, just like a family that cannot balance a budget: Foreign Aid, Farm Subsidies, Federal departments of Education and Commerce, grants to Universities, STUDIES, most federally funded research. I know, some of this will hurt, but we cannot afford it. We also need to give individual people a stake in their health care spending to get some control over things. I can keep going if you like....

    ReplyDelete
  3. Do you honestly think we won't just end up borrowing more to offset this?
    Not sure where you're faith in the republicans ability to cut popular programs comes from.
    8 of the past 10 years the republicans controlled both houses and the presidency and we saw only increases in deficit spending.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You are asking the right question: will we? Do I have faith in the new GOP to stick to what's necessary and cut spending? They will be politically savaged for doing so, but yes, I think it will happen. The pressure from voters like me and markets will be to severe to ignore. But it will be a bumpy ride. And the tax compromise proposed right now only makes things worse as a starting point. More debt. Tax receipts are at an historical low as percentage of GDP right now. That's because the economy has shrunk a lot less than payrolls. If this is permanent then we have a huge problem. We need to get people back to work and back to paying taxes. Growing jobs is absolutely necessary to getting higher tax revenues and lowering social spending. Without more real jobs we will sink, sink, sink.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "We also need to give individual people a stake in their health care spending to get some control over things."
    what in the world does that mean? how much of the military are you willing to cut?
    ss is paid for, if the politicians would just stop taking money out of it, it would last until 2037. the superrich, as buffet has explain pay at a lower tax rate than secretaries or nurses, etc, which is ridiculous. they at least should be paying on a equitable level as everybody else.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Giving people a stake in health care spending means trending away from our current system where co-pays are not a dis-incentive. I favor a system where everyone has catastrophic insurance, 100% coverage for the worst medical situations and the most expensive, but pay for many more typical services out of pocket.

    Military spending is bloated. We have to cut a substantial amount.

    I am more in favor of means testing benefits for SS than raising taxes.

    ReplyDelete