Skip to main content

View Diary: Killing Sacred Liberal Cows, or What Economists Think About the Economy (105 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Parts vs. the Whole (0+ / 0-)

    Thank you for your comment.

    It occurred to me as I was writing the article that the ALL the six ideas taken together make a sort of sense, but separately each idea seems bad.  So the Whole seems greater than the sum of the Parts.

    For example: getting rid of the home mortgaged interest deduction by itself seems like a bad idea.  But as part of a plan that includes elimination of the income tax in favor of a consumption tax, then it sort of makes sense.

    So maybe what the panel of economists were getting at was an overall tax overhaul, rahter than six different ideas to implement separately.

    "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

    by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 12:18:52 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Consumption taxes are anti-progressive. (0+ / 0-)

      A wealthy billionaire can't consume that much more than someone else.  Sure they can buy more, but if you took that billion and spread it out over a million people you'd yield far more consumption who would pay a greater percentage of that billion in consumption taxes than just one guy could.  Plus you don't want to discourage consumption in the marketplace.  That doesn't help improve an economy.  That depresses an economy.

      •  That is why Govt spending e.g. hiring teachers (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        inclusiveheart

        has so much more stimulative effect on the economy than do tax-cuts for the rich. The middle class and below spend the vast majority of their income. The rich invest it somewhere that does not spin off immediate expenditures. So the consumption economy (as opposed to the Wall Street bubble) is starved by tax cuts and fed by govt. hiring.

      •  5 economists disagree with you (0+ / 0-)

        This article points out five respected economists who disagree with you.  

        That five economists all agree is in my opinion, a pretty powerful argument.

        When conservatives began hearing that academics were in agreement about climate change, they steadfastly held on to their opinions, rather than accept empirical evidence.

        As a liberal, I want to be wiser than those conservatives.

        "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

        by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 02:04:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That's not what it says here > > > (0+ / 0-)

          "Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln

          by leftreborn on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 03:01:40 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  First of all, there is no indication that (0+ / 0-)

          these economists believe that their ideas are "progressive".

          Secondly, an awful lot of economists take government for granted - they don't appreciate its intrinsic value - until it is gone - and they haven't a clue what that's really like not to have a government like ours.

          I have experience living in the so-called "third world" and I can assure you that some of these proposals like the consumption tax fuck economies up and prop up a rich elite class that is impossible for anyone else to enter if they aren't already "in".  It is not only anti-American, but also ultimately bad for the economy and economic prospects of those countries.

          This country was built on opportunity.  Instead of relying upon inbred heirs and heiresses to lead our country, we have always benefitted from new blood, smart people who aren't necessarily rich, and people who want to work hard to build "stuff" to make this country great and successful.  

          If you asked these economists if they think that innovation is important to our economy, I am sure that they would all agree that it is.  The thing is that they don't believe in the government helping to fuel innovation and advancement.  They think that the free market should play that role to the exclusion of all else.

          Thankfully, they weren't around when people decided that it would be good for the country to build a nation-wide electrical grid because if they were, we'd still be building it out or relying on battery or fossil fuel powered electricity.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site