Tax reform (i.e., tax cuts) boost economy
By
Rory Ryan-hcpress@cinci.rr.com
Tax reform (i.e., tax cuts) boost economy
The taxman cometh.
Like it or not, there are two Simple Truths in this Great American Life: Death and Taxes. There are even Taxes after Death.
As one who has followed the tax debate for more years than he cares to remember, I’ll attempt to offer a bit of clarity to last week’s column. This would seem to be in order, considering this week’s column by our friend Jim Surber and e-mails from one of my Lynchburg friends who takes great exception to me referring to President Barack Hussein Obama as BHO. (President Roosevelt hasn’t called once when I have referred to him as FDR!)
Many on the pro-tax side of the argument — excuse me, the anti-tax-cutting side — insist that past tax cuts only help the rich. While the “rich” – a relative term in and of itself – may indeed benefit from a particular tax cut, so do many of us who go to work each day for far less extravagant wages.
Hearing some who earn double and triple the average total household income in Highland County blast the “rich,” is a bit amusing. In this
region, they are the rich.
The often-criticized Bush (GWB) tax cuts included real tax relief for working families. Per-child tax credits of $1,000 were a tremendous help for
working families. No marriage tax penalty was a plus for working couples. The tax cuts were even extended to working people who did not earn enough in
annual compensation to qualify for and federal tax liabilities. (Some people used to have another term for “giving” money away.)
The Plain and Simple Truth of the matter is this: Productive, taxpaying American workers received real tax relief under GWB. That other, more affluent taxpayers also received a break does not bother me. I am not envious of them. Many of them used their tax reductions in ways that stimulated the economy. They bought things, for instance. Maybe they bought more cars. Or boats. Or houses. All of which added jobs and income.
According to a study during the Clinton administration (aka The Good Old Days), “since 1984, the House Joint Economic Committee has provided factual
information about the impact of the tax cuts of the 1980s. For many years the JEC has published IRS data on federal tax payments of the top 1 percent,
top 5 percent, top 10 percent, and other taxpayers. The data show that after the high marginal tax rates of 1981 were cut, tax payments and the share of
the tax burden borne by the top 1 percent climbed sharply. For example, in 1981 the top 1 percent paid 17.6 percent of all personal income taxes, but by 1988 their share had jumped to 27.5 percent, a 10 percentage point increase.”
Let’s hope the pro-tax side (er, the anti-tax-cutting side) will read this and not respond by doing another online search for progressive
counter-arguments that don’t hold water.
“High marginal tax rates discourage work effort, saving, and investment, and promote tax avoidance and tax evasion,” the report said. “A reduction in
high marginal tax rates would boost long-term economic growth, and reduce the attractiveness of tax shelters and other forms of tax avoidance.
“The economic benefits of ERTA were summarized by President Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers: ‘It is undeniable that the sharp reduction in taxes in the early 1980s was a strong impetus to economic growth.’”
Give the Clinton advisers some credit. At least they learned from the WJC retroactive tax increase of 1993 which he signed into law, effectively, before being sworn in as the 42nd president. Clinton later championed tax cuts for most working Americans. The study concludes: The Reagan (RWR) tax cuts, (like the JFK tax cuts) showed that REDUCING excessive tax rates stimulates growth, reduces tax avoidance, and can INCREASE the amount and share of tax payments generated by the rich.
Who knew?
Once again, folks, the primary solution to the federal, state and local deficits is not increasing taxes on productive Americans as the BHO
administration supports.
Instead, let’s start by reducing excessive spending in Washington, Columbus and elsewhere.
Mr. Surber ends his always insightful and thought-provoking column this week by writing: “We the people will continue cheerleading for either the
party who would tax the rich, or the party who would give away the store – again.” He’ll find no argument from me on that conclusion.
If the Republicans are successful (which I doubt), in regaining House or Senate majorities in November, they would be wise to review the 1994 Contract with America and see the many ways in which that midterm takeover failed to live up to its promises 16 years ago.
***
• Another thing the Republicans can do is find someone other than Texas Rep. Pete Sessions to appear on “Meet the Press” or any other program. Sessions is a poor choice and a poorer (not literally) voice for the Grand Old Party on national television.
Democrats are having a field day e-mailing the video clip of Sessions’ recent appearance on “Meet The Press.”
When asked repeatedly by host David Gregory to explain what the Republicans would do to cut the deficit, Sessions, the National Republican Congressional Committee chair no less, had no real answers.
He repeated pat phrases such as “We need to live within our means.” “We need to make sure we read the bills.” “We should live within our means and
we should read the bills and work with the American people.”
“Tell me how you do it,” a frustrated Gregory asked. “Name a painful choice that Republicans are prepared to say we have to make?”
Sessions did not name anything of substance. When Gregory offered up a possible repeal of the BHO mandatory medical coverage law, Sessions wouldn’t
even take that convenient lifeline.
I seem to recall Sessions had a former aide convicted of a rather serious felony. I also seem to recall that Sessions shared that person with
a rather embarrassing campaign in the Buckeye State about a decade ago.
Sessions is as much a part of what’s wrong in Washington as is President Obama, Nancy D’Alesandro Pelosi, Harry Reid, et. al.
As Horace Greeley once said, “It’s time to turn the rascals out” (on Nov. 2!).
Rory Ryan is publisher and editor of The Highland County Press.
The taxman cometh.
Like it or not, there are two Simple Truths in this Great American Life: Death and Taxes. There are even Taxes after Death.
As one who has followed the tax debate for more years than he cares to remember, I’ll attempt to offer a bit of clarity to last week’s column. This would seem to be in order, considering this week’s column by our friend Jim Surber and e-mails from one of my Lynchburg friends who takes great exception to me referring to President Barack Hussein Obama as BHO. (President Roosevelt hasn’t called once when I have referred to him as FDR!)
Many on the pro-tax side of the argument — excuse me, the anti-tax-cutting side — insist that past tax cuts only help the rich. While the “rich” – a relative term in and of itself – may indeed benefit from a particular tax cut, so do many of us who go to work each day for far less extravagant wages.
Hearing some who earn double and triple the average total household income in Highland County blast the “rich,” is a bit amusing. In this region, they are the rich.
The often-criticized Bush (GWB) tax cuts included real tax relief for working families. Per-child tax credits of $1,000 were a tremendous help for working families. No marriage tax penalty was a plus for working couples. The tax cuts were even extended to working people who did not earn enough in annual compensation to qualify for and federal tax liabilities. (Some people used to have another term for “giving” money away.)
The Plain and Simple Truth of the matter is this: Productive, taxpaying American workers received real tax relief under GWB. That other, more affluent taxpayers also received a break does not bother me. I am not envious of them. Many of them used their tax reductions in ways that stimulated the economy. They bought things, for instance. Maybe they bought more cars. Or boats. Or houses. All of which added jobs and income.
According to a study during the Clinton administration (aka The Good Old Days), “since 1984, the House Joint Economic Committee has provided factual
information about the impact of the tax cuts of the 1980s. For many years the JEC has published IRS data on federal tax payments of the top 1 percent, top 5 percent, top 10 percent, and other taxpayers. The data show that after the high marginal tax rates of 1981 were cut, tax payments and the share of the tax burden borne by the top 1 percent climbed sharply. For example, in 1981 the top 1 percent paid 17.6 percent of all personal income taxes, but by 1988 their share had jumped to 27.5 percent, a 10 percentage point increase.”
Let’s hope the pro-tax side (er, the anti-tax-cutting side) will read this and not respond by doing another online search for progressive counter-arguments that don’t hold water.
“High marginal tax rates discourage work effort, saving, and investment, and promote tax avoidance and tax evasion,” the report said. “A reduction in high marginal tax rates would boost long-term economic growth, and reduce the attractiveness of tax shelters and other forms of tax avoidance.
“The economic benefits of ERTA were summarized by President Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers: ‘It is undeniable that the sharp reduction in taxes in the early 1980s was a strong impetus to economic growth.’”
Give the Clinton advisers some credit. At least they learned from the WJC retroactive tax increase of 1993 which he signed into law, effectively, before being sworn in as the 42nd president. Clinton later championed tax cuts for most working Americans. The study concludes: The Reagan (RWR) tax cuts, (like the JFK tax cuts) showed that REDUCING excessive tax rates stimulates growth, reduces tax avoidance, and can INCREASE the amount and share of tax payments generated by the rich.
Who knew?
Once again, folks, the primary solution to the federal, state and local deficits is not increasing taxes on productive Americans as the BHO administration supports.
Instead, let’s start by reducing excessive spending in Washington, Columbus and elsewhere.
Mr. Surber ends his always insightful and thought-provoking column this week by writing: “We the people will continue cheerleading for either the party who would tax the rich, or the party who would give away the store – again.” He’ll find no argument from me on that conclusion.
If the Republicans are successful (which I doubt), in regaining House or Senate majorities in November, they would be wise to review the 1994 Contract with America and see the many ways in which that midterm takeover failed to live up to its promises 16 years ago.
***
• Another thing the Republicans can do is find someone other than Texas Rep. Pete Sessions to appear on “Meet the Press” or any other program. Sessions is a poor choice and a poorer (not literally) voice for the Grand Old Party on national television.
Democrats are having a field day e-mailing the video clip of Sessions’ recent appearance on “Meet The Press.”
When asked repeatedly by host David Gregory to explain what the Republicans would do to cut the deficit, Sessions, the National Republican Congressional Committee chair no less, had no real answers.
He repeated pat phrases such as “We need to live within our means.” “We need to make sure we read the bills.” “We should live within our means and we should read the bills and work with the American people.”
“Tell me how you do it,” a frustrated Gregory asked. “Name a painful choice that Republicans are prepared to say we have to make?”
Sessions did not name anything of substance. When Gregory offered up a possible repeal of the BHO mandatory medical coverage law, Sessions wouldn’t
even take that convenient lifeline.
I seem to recall Sessions had a former aide convicted of a rather serious felony. I also seem to recall that Sessions shared that person with a rather embarrassing campaign in the Buckeye State about a decade ago.
Sessions is as much a part of what’s wrong in Washington as is President Obama, Nancy D’Alesandro Pelosi, Harry Reid, et. al.
As Horace Greeley once said, “It’s time to turn the rascals out” (on Nov. 2!).
Rory Ryan is publisher and editor of The Highland County Press.
[[In-content Ad]]