Is Obama Trying To Pull a Reverse Reagan?

U.S. President Obama and Russian President Medvedev meet in Moscow

The editorial page editor at the Washington Post had a thought provoking column today.

Since the Reagan era, some conservatives have hoped to shrink government by “starving the beast.” Refuse to raise taxes, they figured, and eventually spending would have to fall.
It’s beginning to look as though the new team may have a similar strategy, in reverse: Increase spending, and eventually taxes will have to be raised…
The bottom line is this: You cannot run a progressive government of the kind Obama favors by collecting only 18 percent of the gross domestic product in taxes, which has been the norm over the past 40 years. Nor can you increase the tax take to 24.5 percent of GDP — which is what Obama proposes to be spending in 2019 — simply by making the rich pay more.
But rather than level with the American people about this, or lay out a plan to raise the needed taxes, the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress are putting the spending pieces of progressive government in place and apparently counting on the tax piece to fall into place later.

This guy may have divined the Obama administrations plan (in the unlikely event it has one) but his underlying assumptions are pretty much all wrong.
Suppose we’re looking at at massive deficits that we can no longer finance in a couple years. Raising taxes would be the worst thing we could do.
Let’s face it, the US is facing enormous fiscal challenges in the future even without the Obama spending machine getting all they want. Everyone’s known for years and years that Social Security and Medicare were demographic nightmares that were going to cost us in the very near future. Now if you add in all of the spending that Obama wants to do the problem would be even worse.
The only thing that’s going to pay for the Social Security and Medicare nightmare is booming economic growth. We need to have tax rates that encourage growth. We need to get government out of the way rather than mismanage it like the Obama administration is hell-bent to do.
We need to change our immigration policy (or lack thereof) to recruit the best and brightest rather than let in the least educated who need support on the day they get here.
All raising taxes would do is give the government a bigger piece of a smaller pie. That makes it all the worse for those of us in the private sector because not only will we have less income the government will be taking more of it.
What we need to do is tell those living on the government teat is to stop it. That goes for non-productive government employees, welfare cases and yes corporate welfare queens.
Do that and I believe we can weather the storm created by FDR (Social inSecurity) and LBJ (Medicare). Incidentally both of those programs were sold on the idea that they would be much less expensive than they actually are today.

Tags: , ,


«
»
  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    That’s not unreasonable, however I stick to my premise that we need to allow employers to find the best potential employees they can get.

    In the future, I worry that people like you and I are going to increasingly worry more about the emigration rules.

    Where are they going to go?

  • Brent

    We need to change our immigration policy (or lack thereof) to recruit the best and brightest rather than let in the least educated who need support on the day they get here.

    If you honestly think government could do this — and why the “best and brightest” (however that is arbitrarily defined) and not the “hardest working” — then why are you complaining about Obama’s central planning?

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Robert, I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but to dig us out of the hole we’re already in it’s going to take robust economic growth, reform or not.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I was thinking that we need to encourage people to immigrate here that are trained in areas we need. I suppose you could do it by allowing businesses to recruit in foreign countries with the assurance their workers could get their visas (and eventual citizenship).

    I’m just saying looking at the aging population we need young, educated and YES hard working immigrants.

    What are your thought?

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    For the life of me I can’t figure out where a person could go to get a better place to raise a family than in the US.

    I guess it’s worth saving then.

  • Brent

    I’m pro-immigration as a principle, reciprocating my belief that you ought to be allowed to freely leave (unlike, say, East Germany). In the future, I worry that people like you and I are going to increasingly worry more about the emigration rules.

    I think some rules are in order as far as who can immigrate, in order to disallow known criminals from entering the country. That’s reasonable, so I would agree that illegal immigration is problematic (and symptomatic of big government’s inefficiency and inability to provide net value, even in the case of what is considered a “basic role” of government).

    But ultimately, I think there are two choices: 1) Ban all immigration; 2) Allow immigration freely, with some paperwork, background checks, or whatever.

    I don’t think the government can selectively choose immigrants based on the type of labor it thinks the economy needs. That is just plain vanilla economic central planning and it won’t work. A more liberalized version, such as you mentioned, would work better, but it’s still a big waste of resources and it is not fair that a construction company in Arizona can’t hire a would-be lawfully compliant non-criminal Mexican, but Microsoft can hire some Pakistani computer programmer.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    I thought this photo was more illustrative of the meeting:

    Sure looks like they were right that Obama would restore our respect among world leaders.

  • SigFan

    The unfunded liabilities of SS and Medicare are going to be (if they are not already) the millstone around the neck of this country. These two pyramid schemes make Bernie Madoff look like Mother Theresa. Imagine if instead of the mess we have today, people had been given a tax credit for purchasing long-term care insurance to take care of their medical needs after retirement. Imagine if citizens were given a tax credit for taking the same percentage of their incomes confiscated by the government and simply putting it into an interest bearing savings account to provide for their monetary needs after retirement.

    The only way out of this mess is to put an end to them and empower and encourage individual responsibility and investment in your own future. But that would require the politicians to give up the stranglehold they have on seniors and the poor and they will never do that without being forced to.

    On the immigration point, many high-tech companies do recruit and sponsor qualified individuals from many places to come and work here in the US. Most get their green cards with corporate sponsorship and may eventually achieve full citizenship. If the government would expand this program, with sufficient safeguards against fraud, and limit all immigration to those that have a job via a corporate sponsor, we could cut down on many of the immigration problems we have now (assuming tight border security). No job, no green card, no place for you here. Of course married people with offspring would be eligible to bring the family, but if they lose their job (sponsorship) before achieving full citizenship and cannot obtain a new job (sponsor) within a reasonable time limit – sorry, you must go home and seek another sponsor before returning.

  • http://www.dartemis.net/blog/ sayanything-42

    Heh.

    I thought this photo was more illustrative of the meeting:

    Who are you again?

  • Brent

    Where are they going to go?

    Let me rephrase your question: Where are we going to go for medical care after socialized medicine has run its course here? It’s a damn good question, but the ability to go elsewhere at least gives us the opportunity to find someplace.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    So you’re not recommending any specific place to buy an house, just in case?

  • Brent

    No, but I suppose you could just follow Jim Rogers around, though he can afford to live in upscale places in Asia, whereas you wouldn’t want to live in some of the less upscale places (yet at least). I’d put my money on doing what he’s doing… historically, it has worked out rather well and he’s got rather strong reasoning behind his decisions.

    If someone could afford it, having a geographic alternative ready would certainly be a nice hedge against the financial (and, by extension, civil) uprising that the U.S. government seems determined to plow full speed into these next few decades.

  • Brent

    People think that it is crazy to talk about moving elsewhere, yet people do it all the time. The smart ones planned ahead.

    For instance, California’s state and local governments are on the brink of collapse, so it would be smart to have another place to go, like Idaho or another such state. If this is smart (and I think it is), then why in the world would you trust the bozos who run the U.S. government, which is many, many times more reckless than California’s government.

  • Brent

    I guess it’s worth saving then.

    Yeah, of course the U.S. is a great place — even right now — especially relative to most (if not all) others.

    Whistler, we can fight the good fight and, in the end, lose the war. It certainly isn’t a fair fight, with the government schools’ propaganda and all. I don’t see why you think you or your kids deserve to go down with a ship you didn’t sink. Why should you ever have to live in a place that was great, but has since become a disaster?

  • SigFan

    For the life of me I can’t figure out where a person could go to get a better place to raise a family than in the US.

    I agree that this was (and to a large extent is still) true. If we continue down this path though I don’t see that as holding up. I think that there are a few places left in the world that could create an atmosphere that might be comparable, but it would take a huge effort for that to happen. I would much rather see us stay and fight for what we know to be the best country and system of government known to man, but I really question if there are enough of us willing to do so anymore. I know that if worse comes to worst and we fail to get the country back on the right course I am out for the Bahamas. Not ideal, but certainly better than where we are headed.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/Anna/ Anna

    and it is not fair that a construction company in Arizona can’t hire a would-be lawfully compliant non-criminal Mexican, but Microsoft can hire some Pakistani computer programmer.

    I think it’s more than fair. Microsoft sponsors their workers via a H1B Visa and holds their employees accountable there after. No one should be opposed to sponsored immigration when it’s clearly a benefit to our country.

    No job, no green card, no place for you here.

    Absolutely!

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/Anna/ Anna

    For the life of me I can’t figure out where a person could go to get a better place to raise a family than in the US.

    I don’t care if there is another place that may seem better to live. This is MY country and I’ll be damned if I’m going anywhere.
    >:(

  • Brent

    I take pride in standing my ground. I will continue to fight for something long after the battle is over.

    This is very different, though. People in America think that when we talk about “turmoil”, we mean you don’t get a new iPod every year. No, we mean you become a peasant subservient to the government and you are probably in constant danger of being assaulted, murdered, having your children kidnapped, etc. And while you vow to fight on, your neighbors are busy monitoring you in order to call you in to the local authorities, scoring points with the regional ruling thugs.

    What kind of life is that? You can’t “fight” that, I don’t think. It has to kind of run its course, like in other communist countries. Eventually, the people wake up, but only after tens of millions died or were murdered and generations had their lives ruined.

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    Ugh, more talk of taking our money away from us.

  • robert108

    The only thing that’s going to pay for the Social Security and Medicare nightmare is booming economic growth.

    Untrue; until or unless we have real investment programs for those who need end of life medical care and a real retirement program, those programs will continue to drain us. Since they don’t pay for themselves, greater prosperity simply covers up the underlying problem. Economic growth naturally fluctuates, but the cost of govt programs just keeps increasing, whether or not the economy is prosperous.

  • Bat One

    Quibbling about which immigrant workers to allow or encourage to come here, and which to disallow, and how to manage corporate sponsorship/employment misses the point. Whistler has it exactly right:

    The only thing that’s going to pay for the Social Security and Medicare nightmare is booming economic growth. We need to have tax rates that encourage growth. We need to get government out of the way rather than mismanage it like the Obama administration is hell-bent to do.

    Without long-term, sustained economic growth we are doomed financially, even without the added fiscal burden of Obama’s stupid “stimulus” spending.

    Raising taxes is at best a short-term palliative with negative long-term consequences. Every dollar in taxes taken in by the government is that mush less available to help foster real, sustained economic growth. Reducing taxes, particularly the taxes on capital formation, has been proven to generate both economic growth (including increased employment)and additional tax revenues.

    Without fiscal policies that actually promote private sector economic growth, immigration policy changes are essentially meaningless.

  • Brent

    Robert is right that SS/Med are nothing more than redistribution schemes. Everyone “pays in”, but the money immediately goes to others “cashing out” or to other current government spending. Like a Ponzi scheme, nothing is truly invested and so there are no returns. These programs are a massive burden (15.3% of gross income) on all workers… a burden which will inevitably get get bigger and bigger.

  • robert108

    …but to dig us out of the hole we’re already in it’s going to take robust economic growth, reform or not.

    Obviously true, but my disagreement was with the idea that economic growth will somehow save us from the Dem social engineering Ponzi schemes. It won’t. Without them, growth would be even higher. Spending money on the equivalent of a cocaine habit isn’t any less destructive when you are wealthy. It’s just as destructive and stupid, and you end up wasting a lot of your money that could be used in a better way.

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    The only thing that’s going to pay for the Social Security and Medicare nightmare is booming economic growth. We need to have tax rates that encourage growth. We need to get government out of the way rather than mismanage it like the Obama administration is hell-bent to do.

    Hence, further taxes will drive the economy further into the ground than it already is.

  • studakota

    I unlike Michelle Obama but, rather because of her, and her globe trotting husband, am, for the first time in my life, ashamed of my country. It will ever be a puzzlement to this one how a, supposed, intelligent electorate could have elected this stooge. They, apparently, were so guilt ridden by past injustices to his race that they would have elected almost anyone with a dark tinge and an live teleprompter. Here’s an interesting development. You’ll recall the lack of a proper vetting process by the MSM. Turns out, my spies tell me, that Barrack Obama’s great grandfather may have been involved in one or more lynchings of Black men back in the day. How bout them apples, if true.

  • Bat One

    Apparently, Obama knows even less about Russia and international geo-politics than he does about economics and fiscal policy… a potentially lethal combination of ignorances.

    Obama’s strategic arms agreement with the Russians is essentially meaningless pap. It’s designed to take everyone’s attention away from his failed economic policies and to cast him as some sort of statesman… which he most certainly is not.

    His plans to scrap the US’ missile defense system is far more important than this nonsense.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    I agree with brent, and I don’t think you disagree either whistler.

    I say a tall wall with a wide gate. Let all who want to here and can pass basic screening come. But let’s not give quarter to people who can’t follow our immigration laws. And no more funding for duplicating public forms and documents and signs in different languages. If they can’t be bothered to learn our language then clearly they care little for our customs.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development