Fred Thompson, on Economic Misdirection
We need a President who understands that you don’t make citizens prosperous by making Washington richer, and you don’t lift an economic downturn by imposing one of the largest tax increases in American history. Now our opponents tell you not to worry about their tax increases. They tell you they are not going to tax your family. No, they’re just going to tax “businesses”! So unless you buy something from a “business”, like groceries or clothes or gasoline … or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small “business”, don’t worry … it’s not going to affect you. They say they are not going to take any water out of your side of the bucket, just the “other” side of the bucket! That’s their idea of tax reform.
Fred Thompson, Republican National Convention, September 2, 2008
Filed under: Economics & Taxes • Quotes
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
Who’s fact checking this stuff.
Under Obama’s plan, “the TPC estimates that people (or couples) making between $37,595 and $66,354 a year would see an average savings of $1,118 on their taxes.
Under McCain’s plan, on the other hand, those same individuals would save $325 on average — $793 less than the average savings under Obama’s plan.”
Fred Thompson, McCain and others are lying. While everyone is worried about some teenage girl who forget to use protection on night, these are the unfounded truths that are allowed to slip by.
Um, did you read the second half of the quote? The whole “misdirection” in the title of the post is that somehow increasing taxes on businesses doesn’t hit the family pocketbook. The combined hits to prices and wages could easily wipe out $1000, was Fred’s point. Same bucket, different “side”, but much the same effect.
Also false, according to Factcheck.org:
“McCain falsely claimed Obama’s plan would increase taxes on 23 million small-business owners, when the vast majority of them would get a cut.” In addition, The Economist estimates business savings of 2.5% a year. Harvard Business Review also noted a 3.25% savings under the Obama plan for most business owners.
Fair enough, that is indeed what the Brookings and Urban Institutes claim. (For those reading along at home, here is their table of data.)
What I haven’t seen in the tables nor hear anyone say is whether this is after removing the Bush tax cuts. In other words, are they going to raise the price a lot, then cut it a little, then call it a “sale”?
I’m not finding that at the TPC site or FactCheck’s. FactCheck says you can’t blame the expiring tax cuts on Obama because it was part of the original legislation (though they admit it would be the 5th highest tax hike in history). Perhaps, but if he lobbies and votes against them, and indeed if his platform says they should be allowed to expire, then he has just as much culpability in the tax increase as he would have for his own proposed tax cut.
Barika,
Try the following experiment. Get a transcript of Obama’s acceptance speech. Mark campaign promises involving new spending. Estimate the cost. Recall balancing the budget is also one of Mr Obama’s pledges. Consider where that money might come from (realizing the middle class is where most of the money is).
Note that those estimates quoted above were both done before he rolled out lots of new promises last week.
Are they? His platform has been online for months. I don’t know that he’s made any “new promises” that he hadn’t already built into his platform.
I would concede to both of you, I don’t think Obama has a chance of balancing the budget, but from what I’ve seen neither does McCain’s plan. We didn’t rack up a deficit overnight, and honestly we’re not going to fix it overnight. All the estimates show a 2019 a realistic goal of this occurring. I think Obama and McCain camps would win more points if they just admit this fact. However, the TCP study is of Aug 28th, so I would think it does include Obama’s latest policy amendments. But consider this TCP also says, Obama’s tax plan would increase the debt by $3.5 trillion by 2018, while McCain’s plan would bring about a projected $5 trillion increase in the same time frame.
Let me just say I really enjoy debating this with you guys. Its great to have a discussion on facts and issues.
Agreed, Barika, that this country isn’t going to balance the budget anytime soon. With the “Ask
notwhat your country can do for you” mentality that is so prevalent, it’s spending, to me, that is the biggest culprit, not who can raise the most revenue without too much pain. Even if lower taxes raise revenues (as Kennedy, Reagan and even Bush to some extend proved), I still don’t care if those revenues are just fuel for out-of-control spending.It’s those promises of “free” government handouts, “free” healthcare, and other such programs that are really killing us. I think the Republicans are simply less wrong on their program priorities, but wrong nonetheless when trying to pander to their constituents. I’m not really in favor of the Faith-Based Initiative because it entangles religious groups with government money far too wrapped up in attached strings.
But someone who proposes spending cuts is immediately looked at with suspicion by anyone getting those handouts. Alexis de Tocqueville said, “The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.” The politicians have realized it, and far too many of us are happy for the bribe, thinking to be “entitled” to it.
Hence the name of the biggest portion of the federal budget, beating even our own defense; entitlements. Want to balance the budget? Put your hand on that third rail and find out what happens. 🙂
Well I would take issue with that point. I strongly believe in universal health care, (and mind you I make over 6 figure a year, so I’m not looking for a hand out), but I think it’s necessary if we are to compete and keep up with the rest of the industrial world. Consider this, The United States ranks 23rd in infant mortality, down from 12th in 1960 and 21st in 1990. The United States ranks 21st in life expectancy for men down from 1st in 1945 and 17th in 1960. As you can see from these numbers we are falling behind. Let’s also consider this 24% of Corporate salary budgets are related solely to benefits. Other foreign companies do not bear this burn, making them more competitive. Most industrialized countries, and many developing countries, operate some form of publicly-funded health care with universal coverage as the goal. The United States is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not provide universal health care. I think in government, as in the corporate world, we have to look at what works. What advantages do our competitors have that we don’t and in today’s global economy that means looking across to pond to others. The old argument about entitlement just doesn’t hold.
If you want to use the hand theory then think of this way. When Joe goes to emergency room without insurance and racks up a $20,000 bill, and then can’t pay it. Who do you think pays for that cost anyways? Hard working people like you and me. So at the end of the day it becomes my problem and yours. Health insurance premiums have been rising on average by double-digit points over the past five-six years, a rate of increase that is-3 times the rate of inflation. So we are and corporate America as well is paying for this cost any way you slice it. Think about the fact that the health care industry reported $34.5 billion in bad debit. Joe’s never going to pay his share under this system. Chances are he has no job, no savings, no property. So where do the funds come from, you and me.
Regarding health care, if you think health care is expensive now, wait until it’s “free”. That’s not just a quip, either. You say the funds come from you and me now, as if they won’t later. They most certainly will. And somehow it’s thought that a larger bureaucracy will be more efficient. Never has been, never will be.
We’ve hit the health care thing recently, so I’m not going to go into more detail.
Universal “Health Care”
The
“Right” to Pay for your own Medicine
“Change” That Has Already Failed
and its follow-up Health Care Follow-up: Who Do You Believe?
The Elephant in the Healthcare Room
Click on “Medicine” in the categories list for other posts on that topic.