<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Reality Liberation Front &#187; Fiscal Responsibility</title>
	<atom:link href="http://realityliberationfront.com/tag/fiscal-responsibility/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://realityliberationfront.com</link>
	<description>Freeing Reality From The Chains Of Subjectivity Since 1987</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 14:11:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Voodoo Economics Revisited &#8211; Republicans and the Tax Cut Fallacy</title>
		<link>http://realityliberationfront.com/voodoo-revisited/</link>
		<comments>http://realityliberationfront.com/voodoo-revisited/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 20:04:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>TBartine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deficit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fiscal Responsibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George H. W. Bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George W. Bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[National Debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative Pence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ronald Reagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senator Kyl]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senator McConnell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supply Side Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Cuts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voodoo Economics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://realityliberationfront.com/?p=523</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The same group that spent the United States into deficit oblivion, and who ballooned our deficit with tax cuts which most certainly did not pay for themselves...now offer a new solution:  All expenses, like extending unemployment benefits, must be offset by spending cuts elsewhere in the budget...and there should be MORE tax cuts...which they swear will pay for themselves.  These people are called Republicans, and if you believe them, they'd also really like to have majority control of Congress again. They promise they won't spend as much as they did before, and that they'll cut taxes even MORE.  What's wrong with this picture?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Think you know nothing about economics? Chances are you know more than you  think&#8230;perhaps even more than the politicians currently sitting in the U.S.Congress.</p>
<p><strong>YOU</strong> know that there are essentially two sides to the &#8220;<em>balance sheet.</em>&#8221; On one  side is your &#8220;<strong><em>Assets/Revenue/Income</em></strong>&#8220;&#8230;the money that is coming in. On the other  side is your &#8220;<strong><em>Liabilities/Debits/Expenses</em></strong>&#8220;&#8230;the money that is going out.</p>
<p><strong>YOU</strong> know that these two sides, in conjunction, determine your bottom  line&#8230;which is to say, whether or not you are making money (<em>in budgeting, we  call this a &#8220;<strong>surplus</strong>&#8220;</em>) or losing money (<em>in budget terms, a &#8220;<strong>deficit</strong>&#8220;</em>).</p>
<p>Republicans are currently trying to tell us (examples <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/12/jon-kyl-extend-bush-tax-c_n_642862.html"> here</a>, <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/18/mike-pence-explains-why-a_n_650374.html"> here</a>, and <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/18/pete-sessions-nrcc-chair_n_650431.html"> here</a> from Huffington Post) that spending money, like extending  unemployment benefits, increases the deficit and is, therefore, <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>BAD</strong></span>. They say  all measures to spend money <strong>MUST</strong> be offset by reduced spending in other areas.</p>
<p>In principle, this is <strong>TRUE</strong>. <em>Yes</em> -- adding expenses without either increasing  revenue or decreasing expenditures somewhere else&#8230;would increase the deficit.  File that little equation under &#8220;<em>D</em>&#8221; for &#8220;<em>Duh</em>.&#8221;</p>
<p>They also tell us that reducing revenue, for example the Bush tax cuts for the  wealthy, does not increase the deficit and is, therefore, <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>GOOD</strong></span>. They say these  tax cuts do not require that either more taxes be collected somewhere else, or  that spending be decreased to offset their effect.</p>
<p>That much, is <strong>FALSE</strong>&#8230;and is, perhaps, the most irresponsible rationale we&#8217;ve  heard used to justify what amounts to little more than partisan political hackery. Your average person with no financial education whatsoever can see that  decreasing the amount of tax revenue without increasing revenue somewhere else  or decreasing expenses <strong>WOULD</strong> increase the deficit.</p>
<p>See the attached graph&#8230;and you&#8217;ll see that tax cuts, in fact, have a bigger  impact on increasing the deficit than two foreign wars, stimulative spending,  and entitlement programs:</p>
<p><img class="alignnone" title="CBPP - Deficit Breakdown" src="http://realityliberationfront.com/uploads/Resources/CBPPchart.jpg" alt="" width="301" height="366" /></p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&amp;id=3036">Center on  Budget and Policy Priorities</a></p>
<p>This particular deception&#8230;is nothing new.  Once upon a time, in our  not-so-distant past, a man named George Herbert Walker Bush (a Republican) ran against another  man named Ronald Reagan (also a Republican) for President of the United States.  Reagan  espoused an idea that has come to be known as &#8220;<em>Supply Side Economics</em>.&#8221;  Essentially, this theory holds that reducing taxes on the private sector will  lead to significant economic growth&#8230;enough growth to offset the loss of tax revenue.   Bush, in challenging Reagan&#8217;s proposal, would famously call this &#8220;<strong><em>voodoo economics.</em></strong>&#8220;  Watch part of the debate  between the two men:</p>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/edchtf9MS7g&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/edchtf9MS7g&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edchtf9MS7g">www.youtube.com/watch?v=edchtf9MS7g</a></p></p>
<p>Reagan would later go on to win the election, and today he is viewed by many in the  Republican Party to be a &#8220;<em>true conservative hero,</em>&#8220; a sort  of epitome of what Republicans are &#8220;supposed to be.&#8221; But the truth is that  his presidency, in many ways, represented an <strong>END</strong> to responsible, fiscal  conservatism, and it was during his presidency that America&#8217;s federal deficit,  and our national debt, <strong>SKYROCKETED</strong>.</p>
<p>In fact, if we look at the increase in the national debt while the last two  Democrats were in office, Carter and Clinton, we saw increases of 42% and 36%,  respectively.</p>
<p>While Reagan, following &#8220;<em>tax cut ideology</em>,&#8221; was President&#8230;the  National Debt <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>increased by 182%</strong></span>.</p>
<p>George H. W. Bush, who initially lambasted &#8220;<em>tax cut ideology</em>,&#8221; only to  later adopt it himself&#8230;.saw an increase of <strong>55%.</strong></p>
<p>George W. Bush, also added <strong>MORE</strong> tax cuts&#8230;and saw an increase of <strong>89%</strong>.</p>
<p><em>Wait a minute</em>.  Here are the Republicans, claiming <strong>STILL</strong> to be the party  of &#8220;<em>fiscal responsibility and conservatism</em>,&#8221; and they are spending us into  <strong>MORE</strong> debt than the Democrats, and are continuing to reduce our tax revenue through  tax cuts, creating a <strong>LARGER</strong> deficit than under Democrats.  How exactly is  this methodology either &#8220;<em>responsible</em>&#8221; <strong>OR</strong> &#8220;<em>conservative</em>?&#8221;</p>
<p>And what&#8217;s worse, they continue to spout the <strong>SAME</strong> lie as before.  Just  this month, Mike Pence (R-Ind.) said, &#8220;<strong>The reality is that as you study &#8212; when President  Kennedy cut marginal tax rates, when Ronald Reagan cut marginal tax rates, when President Bush  imposed those tax cuts, they actually generated economic growth, they expand the economy, they  expand tax revenue.</strong>&#8220;  Senator Kyl (R-Az.) has echoed this idea, as  have Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and many others in the GOP.  Unfortunately for  Pence, and for all of us, what he says is clearly <strong>NOT</strong> reality.   George W. <a href="http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy04/pdf/2003_erp.pdf"> Bush&#8217;s economic policy group</a> told him tax cuts would not generate enough  growth to make up for the lost revenue. Bush&#8217;s Chief Economist was even more  direct about this when he said, &#8220;<strong>You are smart people. You know that the tax  cuts have not fueled record revenues. You know what it takes to establish  causality. You know that the first order effect of cutting taxes is to lower tax  revenues. We all agree that the ultimate reduction in tax revenues can be less  than this first order effect, because lower tax rates encourage greater economic  activity and thus expand the tax base. No thoughtful person believes that this  possible offset more than compensated for the first effect for these tax cuts.  Not a single one.</strong>&#8221;</p>
<p>And yet so many Americans, seduced by the idea of tax cuts and ignoring their  own common sense, still accept and repeat the GOP&#8217;s fiscal mantra: &#8220;<em>Tax cuts  pay for themselves.</em>&#8221;</p>
<p>I love a good ideological debate, and there are a great many that we can  have&#8230;but is it necessary for us to debate an issue where one side&#8217;s position  is <em>completely, demonstrably false</em>?  Must we continue to listen to  the same people who ballooned our debt and our deficit, by cutting tax revenues  while spending as if the money were on fire&#8230;tell us that they deserve to be  elected back into office because <em>they</em> have the solution to the problem: <strong><em>More tax cuts and responsible spending&#8230;the latter of which they proven  incapable of doing</em></strong>?  For how long, in the face of overwhelming  evidence to the contrary and amidst the screaming of expert economists, must  Americans still see the GOP as the party of &#8220;<em>foreign policy and fiscal  responsibility?</em>&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>An Analogy</strong>:  You are very sick.  You go to a doctor who says  he has a revolutionary, &#8220;<em>proven</em>&#8221; cure (<em>although he can&#8217;t produce any  proof of it actually working</em>) called &#8220;<em>slap therapy.</em>&#8220;  He slaps  you&#8230;nothing happens, you&#8217;re still sick.  He says, &#8220;<em>Well, you have to  do it more than once</em>,&#8221; and slaps you again&#8230;but you&#8217;re still sick.   You decide to try another doctor who has an actual, proven, documented therapy  which has helped millions of people&#8230;but it will take months of treatment, and  the treatment is uncomfortable.  You try it, but after a few weeks you are  tired of the discomfort and waiting so you go back to the first doctor.  He  says he has the answer to your problems: &#8220;<em>slap therapy</em>.&#8221;  And the  slapping begins anew&#8230;</p>
<p><strong>America&#8230;aren&#8217;t you tired of getting slapped?</strong></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://realityliberationfront.com/voodoo-revisited/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

