Friday, March 14, 2008

Economic Ignorance Strikes Again

According to Foxnews.com, "The House passed its $3 trillion budget plan by a 212-207 vote. It would provide generous increases to domestic programs but bring the government's ledger back into the black, but only by letting all of Bush's tax cuts expire at the end of 2010 as scheduled." This is utter nonsense. This makes the patently false assumption that if taxes are increased, it won't affect people's behaviors. It ignores the fact that the tax cuts, by leaving more money in the economy, helped the economy to grow and, thus, increased revenues. (We ran in the red not because of reduced revenues, but because of increased spending.) It also ignores the fact that when you remove money from the economy, it slows the economy down. The welfare socialists always argue that the money taken in by the government is spent in the economy, so it shouldn't affect the economy. This only goes to show how incredibly ignorant fools they are when it comes to understanding the economy -- of course they are socialists, so that's already proof positive of their ignorance of economics. These are the same people who argue that more broken windows helps the economy because it causes people to spend money in the window sector of the economy. They don't understand that wealth and value are the same, that with broken windows, there is a decrease in value (the broken window) and that the money could have been spent elsewhere (on something that added, rather than replaced, value). Government doesn't add value. It takes away value, and replaces what was more valuable with something less valuable. Thus, wealth is destroyed. And that is what's going to happen when taxes go up. Of course, the Democrats know for a fact that tax revenues went up when the rates were cut -- they too are capable of viewing facts and understanding reality. Why, then, do they choose to ignore it? What else do they have up their sleeves?

The bottom line of the line quotes, though, is this: It's utter nonsense. You can't have an increase in spending with an action that will result in a decrease in revenues, and run in the black. Could someone with some sort of knowledge of the world please start writing for the media?

No comments: