Do Tax Cuts Give Away Your Money?
March 24th, 2008 by Peter SudermanOne of the things that makes Ezra Klein such an effective liberal advocate is that he’s policy-smart and spin-smart. In other words: He knows what he’s talking about and how to shape effective messages using what he knows. So he can dive into wonk shop-talk on one hand and deploy with tough rhetorical maneuvers on the other without missing a beat.
So, take this post for example, titled, “Chart of the day: ‘John McCain wants to give all your money to rich people’ edition.” He then shows us a chart from our lefty friends at the Center for American Progress showing the distribution of McCain’s proposed tax cuts. By a pretty large margin, those cuts go toward the the top quintile.
Giving all your money to rich people is certainly a savvy way to put it, if you’re a liberal anyway. But I’m not sure it’s quite honest. The assumption is that the money was yours, ours, Ezra’s, the Center for American Progress’s — anyone but the original earner’s — to begin with. But that’s simply not the case.
Instead, what I’d say is that those tax cuts would do is let all people keep more of their money. Successful people will, of course, tend to be able to keep more simply because they have more to keep. But when the top 10% of earners pays 70% of income taxes, that’s probably not all that surprising.
I think Ezra’s on to something when he notes that McCain’s anti-earmark crusades — much as I think they’re a good thing — aren’t enough to squelch federal spending. I’d certainly like to see him propose greater, more far-reaching cuts in spending, though I understand the political rationale for choosing not to. Tax cuts and earmarks, on the other hand, are issues that a smart politician can and should lead with, and good, politically possible ways to move the limited government agenda forward.
March 25th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
THOSE LYING LIBERALS
TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH!
The Liberals want us to believe all tax cuts went the “rich”.
First of all, who are these “rich”? In my mind, a “rich” person has no job and does not have to get up and work to pay his bills. They pay no regular taxes, only a capital gains tax. No job, no income tax no cuts.
Tax cuts 101; let’s explain tax cuts.
There is a brand new store. Tires R Us. Grand opening, balloons, guy in a monkey suit, the works.
Everyone who walks in gets a coupon for10% off your total purchase.
Mark is driving by and sees the new store. He does not really need anything but stops in to take a look. He finds a $10.00 tube he thinks the kids might like float in on the lake. He uses his coupon and pays$9.00 and saves $1.00.
( 10.00 X 10=1.00…10.0-1.0 = 9.00)
Tom comes in and needs one tire. He buys a top of the line for $100.00, uses his coupon and pays $90.00 and saves $10.00
( 100 X.10=10.00….. 100.00-10.00=90.00)
Joe needs all four new tires so he buys $400.00 uses his coupon and pays $360.00 and gets $40.00 savings with his coupon.
(400 X 10=40.00….. 400.00-40.00=360.00)
NOT FAIR! The Liberals cry.
Look, Joe got a higher “cut” than Mark and Tom. Tire cuts for the rich! Joe got a $40 tire cut while Tom only got $10 and Mark only got $1.
So by liberal logic, even though Joe paid more, he is not entitled to a bigger savings.
End of lesson
March 25th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Look…this just sounds like more bribery with people’s own money in order to try and win an election…GWB & the year 2000 anyone? Supply-side economics is dead…tax cuts without spending increases = huge deficits, period.