"I can make a firm pledge, under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."
Barack Obama
Bernanke urges more ‘Stimulus Spending’
Not that this obvious failure, demonstrated in Japan for over two decades and counting and now demonstrated in the US for the past two years as well, will ever deter the tax-and-spenders. After all, they have a formula. However, as usually happens in great contractions, interventionist theories will eventually be shipwrecked by implacable market forces. The question for the citizenry is largely can the interventionists be stopped before they have spent everything?
As a reminder why the notion that government spending can 'help' he economy is nutty, the government does not possess any resources or wealth of its own. All is can do is shift already existing private wealth forcibly from 'A' to 'B'. The only way this can have a positive effect on the economy is if we were to believe that the government does a better job at allocating scarce resources than the private sector. This in turn runs into the insurmountable calculation problem of socialism. That government spending is a burden on the economy and will destroy even more wealth should be beyond the slightest doubt. Alas, as you can see, the Fed chief believes otherwise.
-----------------------------------------
The public knows very well that it will have to pay for all the 'free lunches' provided by the government. Thus the prospect of higher taxes and higher inflation, both of which are usually unavoidable after a big spending orgy, leads people to shelve investment plans. Why invest when you know the fruits of your labor will later be confiscated by the State?
However, it must be noted here: for tax cuts to work, they must be accompanied by a commensurate reduction in government spending. The burden on the economy must be relieved at both ends.
-----------------------------------------
Thus what is required is not more spending, but more saving and investment. Printing money will only distort the economy more on a structural level precisely what Austrian economists warned that Greenspan's post Nasdaq-bubble policy would in the end wreak. Never mind that they have been proved entirely correct and were the only economists to correctly predict the bust. Whether one has been right or wrong is apparently not a criterion of any importance when it comes to implementing economic policy. Let's rather do the same thing over and over again, only bigger. It has never worked in the past, but this time it surely will!
This, in a word, is institutionalized insanity.
The estate tax will effect 0.37% of Americans but will raise billions to chip away at the deficit. It is quite American, a number of the Fathers were in favor so as to prevent great accumulation of wealth.
Unfortunately most of that 0.37% of Americans are people who have rural holdings and farm for a living.
(Other family owned small business fit the same category and that is the very backbone of the American economy, not exclusive wall street and international corporations.)
The estate tax is the singly the foremost reason for the alarming rate of the demise of the family farm and mom and pop business establishments in America.
During the administration of FDR who pursued the same sort of fiscal policies of the present administration, one of which was greatly increased taxes, particularly on the wealthy, the truly wealthy put all their assets into foundations and tax free trusts where they remain today.
So when obama and the dimwitrats say 'tax the rich' what they are talking about is taxing the middle class and upper middle class or 'bourgeoisie' into non existance. That is the segment of our population who provide 77% of the jobs in this country.
Not everyone understands that marxism isn't really about making everyone the same, what it is about is establishing a world wide system in which a few wealthy elitists have enormous power.
Even Obama's own chief financial advisor says that increasing taxes has a contractual effect on the economy.
During the administrations of Cooledge, JFK, Reagan and W. Bush, tax relief led to a resurging economy.
During higher tax rates under Wilson, FDR, Carter and Obama, the economy has contracted, thus more unemployment, less availabe capital investmensts, etc. etc.
To a lesser extent the latter would include Clinton but the 'republican revolution' put the kibash on his agenda since congress controls the purse strings.
We venture down these roads over and over in our country. See ya at the next crash!
Posted via VolNation Mobile
The main reason for this never ending cyle is the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and the hundreds of amendments over the years that has stengthened the position of the international cabal of financiers.
Someone tell me again why the current financial reform just passed by the democrats and signed by obambi gives these private entities the right to examine our personal financial dealings in minute detail but we the people don't have the slightest right to look into how these private enterprises transfer trillions of dollars anywhere in the world without our even having the priviledge of knowing where even one dime of it goes.
Does anyone but me see something wrong with that picture????????????????????
