We seem to have become a "math challenged" society. I saw it many times during my 40+ years as a custom homebuilder. A client would come to me and say they had a hard budget of $ X . After learning what they wanted in terms of their amenities, I would advise them they should expect approx Y square feet in order to stay within budget.
Then we would all sit down with the architect and they would tell him to cap the footage at Y feet, and that they were willing to accept smaller secondary bedrooms, say 100 square feet each...."so make them 12 feet x 12 feet."
That's pretty much how our government has worked for decades. A succession of congresses and presidents have wanted more than they could pay for. That's how we got our $19,000,000,000,000 deficit. We got away with it because no matter how badly we f__ked things up here in America, we were still less f__ked up than the rest of the world. Smart money "over there" would invest their money here (read: finance our deficit) because we were still considered a safe, stable country. It was all relative.
Tomorrow Prez Trump is going to give Congress his new budget outline. He's said he was going to dramatically boost defense spending and infrastructure improvement, while not touching Social Security or Medicare. Oh, and he wants a BIG tax cut, too. I'm sure the Tea Party is sweating bullets right now! Their whole reason for being is to cut spending and the deficit, and here a fellow Republican is proposing an increase in both.
"Not to worry" they'll say. "We're going to increase income by growing the economy by 4% (thereby increasing tax revenues) and by cutting 'waste, fraud, and inefficiency'".
Have you ever heard a competent financial adviser say, "Sure, go ahead and buy that big new vacation house. You're bound to get a substantial raise any day now. I hope." And hasn't every president since Calvin Coolidge promised to save money by cutting waste, fraud, and inefficiency? *still waiting*
The truth is, there are too many powerful constituencies (read: voters, special interests, and campaign contributors) who would scream bloody murder if Congress cut anything that affected them, and if there's anything every congressman loves it's happy voters and campaign contributors, so....
What will eventually happen is there will be, out of absolute dire necessity, a substantial tax increase on the wealthy. "But how is that fair", the rich will ask? My answer: It isn't, but it's sorta like the answer John Dillinger gave when asked why he robbed banks: "Because that's where the money is."
Fact.
S
WARNING! Back yourself into a corner, sit down, and hold on to your wallets. The politicians are putting together their budgets.
The Republican Party has for years called for cutting, or at least not raising, taxes. It's the glue that holds that party together. Every two years they run for re-election proudly proclaiming that they didn't raise taxes on their watch.
They are equally adamant about their opposition to "re-distribution", the policy of taking money from one class and giving it to another. And the Democratic Party just smiles and lets them get away with it, as they are silent partners in this sham.
Sham? What ever do you mean, Lowandslow?
It's all about the definition of "tax". To my way of thinking, taking money from my pocket and putting it in the government's pocket is a "tax". But what about all those "fees" and licenses we're required to pay? Whenever the pols need a few more $$$ they just raise "fees", never "taxes". What's the difference between a "tax" and a "fee"?
Example: Years ago I had a nursery license (landscape, not the juvenile holding facility kind). It originally cost me $10 a year. Then it went to $30 a year, then $90, and when it got to $300 (?) I decided it wasn't worth it and let it lapse.
I'm sure the same can be said for licenses for electricians, plumbers, beauticians, exterminators, etc. Likewise the cost to get your yearly auto registration and safety inspection has greatly outpaced inflation.
Wanna go to a state or national park? It'll cost you more than it did a few years ago. The list of things we have to pay for that falls outside the traditional definition of a "tax" is long. It may seem like small stuff, but it adds up.
Oh...and toll roads! In my state, because the politicians won't dare raise the gasoline tax, which is used to build and maintain public roads, they've come up with a new scheme: set up new "tollway authorities" and let them build the roads and charge tolls. Or worse, let them take a road we've already paid to build and turn it into a toll road. I spend well over $1000 a year on tolls. Now we're talking BILLIONS! But at least they didn't raise my taxes. Whew!
And isn't a "subsidy" really just a "re-distribution"? When taxpayer money is given as a subsidy to the oil industry, Big Pharma, Big Ag, Wall Street, etc, by my definition that's a "re-distribution". I once had that money, then government got it and gave it to someone else. Someone with political connections no doubt. Same with tax loopholes. Added up, these total HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS! But it's OK...sleep well...they aren't "taxes".
Here's my challenge for our politicians, particularly the Republicans as they seem to hold all the cards these days: Declare all things that require us to pay our money to the government a "tax". No more "fees" or other obfuscated terminology.
Declare all things that transfer our money to someone else a "re-distribution". And when one group can avoid paying taxes (formerly known as a loophole), requiring another group to pick up the slack, that should also be declared a "re-distribution".
Now let's see 'em backtrack, declaring tax increases to not be so bad after all. But...but...uhh...
Here's my point: Don't bullshit us. Admit the government needs money to conduct business on our behalf. But instead of lamenting HOW MUCH we're paying in taxes, concentrate on HOW IT'S BEING SPENT. Right now we're not getting our money's worth.
Waaaaaay too much taxpayer money is being wasted on crap stuff that is of minimal if any value, and waaaaaay too much taxpayer money is being handed out as political largess. The bureaucrats and political insiders are living very well at the expense of the rest of us.
Politicians need to learn that The People won't mind paying taxes IF THEY FELT THEIR MONEY WAS BEING WISELY SPENT. Right now we're NOT feeling the love.
S
Lemme see if I have this right: The Republicans say no new taxes on the rich because they (the rich) are the ones who are the "job creators", and taxes on them would kill off the new jobs we desperately need right now.
Sounds good on the surface, but it doesn't seem to hold up under scrutiny. When the economy imploded in 2008 it was estimated that over two TRILLION dollars was moved out of various investment vehicles (stocks, mutual funds, corporate bonds, etc). Just today CNBC (business news channel) said again that roughly a TRILLION dollars was still on the sidelines not invested. In other words the rich are NOT using their money right now to create new jobs. They're sitting on their wealth waiting for lucrative investments to come along, but there are too many unknowns right now to make them feel comfortable parting with their cash.
So if a little less of rich folks money was sitting idle on the sidelines not creating jobs, how would that hurt the economy? Seems to me if it were part of an agreement (along with cutting tons of waste, fraud, and bloat from government programs) to dramatically reduce the deficit, THAT would eliminate some uncertainty and help create jobs. Think of it as a bit of "pump priming".
Make sense?
S
