Monday, June 20

Democrats: J'accuse

"I'll take the high road and you take the low road, and I'll be in Scotland before ye." Old Scottish Tune

As an American Voter, I have one wish.

I wish politicians and pundits would commit themselves to telling the truth; take the High Road, if you will. That one thing would make all the difference in quality of life in America. Everyone would gain. As it is, the Democrats, especially, seem to prefer the Low Road. Lies and misinformation. They loudly accuse the Republicans of lying, but a look at the facts turns the spotlight back to the Democrats.

Let's look at the economy, for example.

The official Democratic line on President Bush's fiscal policies is that they're a disaster. They claim that "Bush plans devastating cuts to America's top priorities, from homeland security to health care to education to benefits for veterans and much more. Despite these cuts, this budget is a fiscal disaster, with Bush's trademark irresponsibility pushing America deeper into the red with another record deficit." The quote is from the Democratic Party website.

But look at the truth:

"Federal tax revenues surged in the first eight months of this fiscal year by $187 billion, writes Stephen Moore in "This represents a 15.4% rise in federal tax receipts over 2004. Individual and corporate income tax receipts have exploded like a cap let off a geyser, up 30% in the two years since the tax cut. Once again, tax rate cuts have created a virtuous chain reaction of higher economic growth, more jobs, higher corporate profits, and finally more tax receipts.

"This Laffer Curve effect has also created a revenue windfall for states and cities. As the economic expansion has plowed forward, and in some regions of the country accelerated, state tax receipts have climbed 7.5% this year already. Perhaps the most remarkable story from around the nation comes from the perpetually indebted New York City, which suddenly finds itself more than $3 billion in surplus thanks to an unexpected gush in revenues. Many of President Bush's critics foolishly predicted that states and localities would be victims of the Bush tax cut gamble."

The Laffer Curve is an economic theory that Democrats disparage despite proven results. Reaganomics, it turns out, was based on the theory. When President Reagan lowered the tax rate in the highest income tax brackets from 70% to 20%, the result was an economic burst that almost doubled federal tax receipts: from $517 billion to $1,032 billion.

The idea is that lowering the tax rate on production, work, investment and risk-taking will spur more of these activities and leads to more tax revenue collections for the government.

All is not sweetness and light, however. Congress is on a spending spree -- federal expenditures are up $110 billion, or 7.2%, so far this year. However, it's now projected that the budget deficit will be at least $60 billion lower than last year.

States and cities, led by California, which a few years ago were awash in debt themselves, will enjoy net surpluses of at least $50 billion. Total government borrowing will come in at below 2.5% of national output -- hardly a crisis level of debt.

Opponents of the tax cut maintained that interest rates would soar, but today long-term rates are lower than ever.

All of this is public information, folks -- at the US Department of Labor . Everyone has access to it. So why do the Democrats continue to lie about the condition of the economy? Because they know most people won't do the research to find out the truth and they don't care to be honest and tell the truth.

And the truth gets even better: In the private-sector, we now have an investment boom. Lower capital gains and dividends taxes capitalized into higher stock values, which is partly why the Dow is up 24% since May 2003 while the Nasdaq has risen 39%.

Dan Clifton of the American Shareholder Association, Moore writes, estimates that this rise in stock values has translated into roughly $3 trillion in added wealth holdings of American households. The severe slump in business capital spending in 2001 and 2002 has now taken a U-turn, with spending on capital purchases up 22% since 2003. Because higher wages and new job creation depend on business capital investment, the so-called 'Bush tax cut for the rich' has enormously benefited middle-income workers.

Honest people in an honest Democratic Party would simply admit the truth and find another issue -- preferably a valid issue not being addressed -- to work on. I just don't understand why they have to take the Low Road.

1 comment:

JNelson said...

It's hard to deny the plain facts from the DoL. On paper, these numbers are very significant and very supportive of the Bush Tax Cuts. But you're not being honest yourself. You post one article describing some basic numbers without any consideration of where those surpluses are going. Also, this article and yourself both ignore the fact that the wealth disparity in this country is at an all time high according to the Federal Reserve:

The numbers are up on paper, and the tax cuts make it seem that the money is being spent more efficiently. However, this does not account for the effects of the disparity on the lowest income families. Keep in mind that it is these families that need the most help while also creating the greatest drain on our nations health care systems. As the gap widens, then these people will suffer greatly. There is many more ways that the government can improve its spending habits.

But to say that Democrats are liars based on the weak example of the economy shows your own disconnect with the lower income people of this country - it is not getting easier for them. The trickle down effect may temporarily lower their consumer spending by making cheap food less expensive, but it simultaneously encourages degredation of the inner cities and cyclical problems of the disadvantaged for a much longer time. Thinking in only short-term gains is poor economic policy and would suggest a fiscal disaster. On top of all that, after the tax cuts, more corporatations put their money overseas. Meaning, they got the small benefit of a tax cut, maybe made slight improvements in their facilities, but mainly kept their money out of the American economy and certainly out of the hands of the many. Maybe they didn't lie about this, but it sure ain't honest, sustainable business for all Americans. The issue of honesty is more of an issue of transparency, and your boys are much better at keeping the facts hidden.

The problem I am having with your blog and most Republican ranters is that you claim to be unbiased and that the other side is always lying while you yourself poses no tolerance or any real solutions. You gobble up exactly what the MSM wants you to believe about the status of our economy without ever really exploring the alternatives to our nation's current spending habits.

It's not John Dean, nor Jimmy Dean - It's Howard Dean.