Tax Cuts Save Money … Here’s How

Democrats are fond of asking Republicans, “How are you going to pay for your tax cuts?” They ask this a lot, I’ve noticed. However, Democrats do not ask, “How are we going to pay for our massive spending increases?” They don’t even call their spending increases “spending increases” anymore. They’ve taken in recent years to calling them “investments” instead. Some things, however, are sacrosanct; a “tax cut” is still a “tax cut.”

The great irony in all this is that lowering tax rates, across the board, doesn’t actually cost money. Rather, it saves money. The logic is so simple, in fact, that it’s often overlooked, and it goes like this. When American workers keep more of what they earn, due to lower tax rates, they’re saving more of their own money. See? I told you it was simple. After all, the money that we earn belongs, first and foremost, to us. Not to our government. Doesn’t it seem logical, then, that we tell our government how much of our money it gets to spend, rather than our government telling us how much we get to keep?

What I’m suggesting is a shift in our frame of reference, a slight yet thoroughly radical shift. Because once all American tax payers embrace their financial resources as belonging to them, and not to the government, we can all begin to better appreciate the federal bureaucracy for what it is.

Come April 15, our government is like an irrepressible teenager on a Friday night, approaching Mom or Dad to get money for the weekend; money this teenager will, in turn, spend on cheeseburgers or movies or beer. Wouldn’t it be nice if you could look your offspring in the eye and ask, “Are you going to spend this money wisely? Can you show me where, in the past, you have actually spent it wisely, this money that I keep giving you?”

Your suddenly and irrepressibly honest offspring would say, “Actually, I’ve taken your money, bought a bunch of beer with it, and crashed your car into other cars all around town. And this is costing you more money than you could ever hope to pay off. It’s actually going to bankrupt you. But never mind all that, because this time I want even more of your money than you gave me last time. So that I can keep doing the same irresponsible things I’ve been doing. And no, I won’t change my ways.”

As a parent, how would that make you feel?

Bear that feeling in mind whenever you hear Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton or some other liberal politician urging you to ‘invest’ more of your hard-earned money in bigger government. What they’re really talking bout is the federal bureaucracy spending more money on inefficient, ever-expanding federal programs, more lobbyists, more regulations and more government control, crashing more cars all over town and bankrupting us in the process.

Advertisements

Donald Trump, Virtual Reality and the Wall of Rome

On the heels of Super Tuesday, let us consider Republican front-runner Donald Trump, along with the many Washington insiders in whose collective mind Mr. Trump is an enigma. They do not understand him. I’m not sure I do either, but I do know that Trump’s appeal resides outside the oligarchical world of Washington insiders. His bond with a loyal base of voters is beyond foreign to them. It is anathema.

An illustration. Consider the process whereby one may don a headset and become immersed in an alternate world, one that seems real because its pathway to the mind floods with stimuli. In the process, the subject becomes removed from what resides beyond their immediate perception. The effect of this phenomenon, know as Virtual Reality, is so powerful it can be used to anesthetize patients during surgical procedures.

What’s disconcerting, frightening even, is the potential for people to become so seduced by Virtual Reality that they do not wish to leave it, convinced they are better sustained by what seems real, than by what is real. Disconnected from the outside world, they no longer understand, appreciate or value it. Such is the plight of, for example, a severe heroin addict or, as another example, a severe Washington bureaucrat.

Continue reading

Bureaucrats, the Fortune 500 and Bigotry

There I sat, among a party of six, enjoying fine Italian cuisine. Our West Los Angeles neighborhood is more than a bastion of liberalism; it’s home to several trendy trattorias and ritzy ristorantes, and well-heeled patrons who keep them afloat. As I enjoyed my ravioli and spinachi al limone, politics somehow came up at our table, concerning basic differences between Democrats and Republicans.

It was just prior to desert that one of the women in our party stated, “The way I see it, Republicans are pro-business. And Democrats are pro-people.”

I sensed this was the night I was to ‘come out’ to my liberal friends, show my true political colors. So I chimed in, “You know, I think the Democrats are actually more pro-government, and it’s the Republicans who are pro-people.”

To which she replied, as if she’d been waiting for the chance, “But the government is the people.”

‘Damn the torpedos,’ I thought, as I continued, “Well, I got news for you. All those bureaucrats who run our federal government … over in Washington … I don’t think they represent the people of this country any more than the executives who run the Fortune 500. Maybe even less so.”

She looked rather stunned and, yes, quizzical. And since I now commanded the attention of everyone at our table, whether I wanted it or not, I continued. “Think about it. There are thousands of bureaucrats who run all the different agencies and departments that comprise, well, a really big part of our government. They put out tons of rules and regulations telling us citizen-peons what to do all the time, how to run our businesses, spend our money and live our lives. But these government bureaucrats aren’t elected. Hell, we don’t even know who they are. Who do they answer to? Maybe to some other bureaucrat, but not to you or me, I can guarantee you that. And we’re paying their salaries with our taxes. They don’t answer to the citizens of this country any more that the CEO of some publicly held corporation. At least that CEO has a board of directors and about a hundred thousand shareholders to answer to.”

“Well,” she said, still stunned, “I really don’t know about that. But the bottom line for me is that … I just … don’t like Republicans.”

“Wait, you mean you don’t like Republican politics?” I asked. “Or you don’t like them as people?”

“Both,” she said with a smile, eliciting laughter and approval from nearly everyone else at our table. And there were lots of nods as she continued, “They’re just despicable, the way they hate women, and minorities, and gays, and the environment, and abortion. They’re greedy and stupid, and bigots.”

“Wow!” was pretty much all I could say – my turn to be stunned.

Soon I began to gather my wits, and managed a few more words. “So, I’m trying to get my head around what you just said, because … I mean, I can understand your not liking someone’s politics, opinions being what they are. But you just made a really negative judgment on the character of millions of people, literally. People of different backgrounds, different ages, genders, ethnicities. These are people you’ve never met and will never know as individuals. But, you – all you guys – seem to think all these millions of people, who you don’t know, are truly ‘despicable’ because they call themselves Republicans, or vote Republican, or both. The attitude you just expressed strikes me as the very essence of bigotry. And since I never thought of you guys as bigoted people, this is kind of a revelation for me.”

And I’ll tell you what – if you ever want to upset a table full of liberals, just call them a bunch of bigots and watch the ‘S’ hit the fan.