Strange words

I was listening to a presentation the other day where two economists were interviewed about the short term future of our economy.

Each was an adviser in  a presidential administration, one democrat and the other republican.

I heard both of these economists, who might properly be categorized as one liberal and the other conservative, refer to tax cuts as “incentives”.

When did government not taking money from us become an incentive to us?

We deserve better

Brutus

14 Responses to Strange words

  1. What's in a name says:

    Brought to you by the same people that call torture “enhanced interrogation.”

    Like

  2. John Dungan says:

    Because when they say ‘tax cuts,’ they really mean only for a select few, and not for everybody.

    Like

  3. Anonymous says:

    The question is specious.

    By definition, a tax cut would be a decrease in what is already being collected.

    Your question would regard the reason the taxes are being collected in the first place, not any resulting use of them afterward.

    With respect to incentive, the decrease would be for the purpose of encouraging a specific behavior, such as business investment or retirement savings.

    The presentation of your question is deceptive in that it purports to put a conservative and a liberal on equal footing with respect to taxes, taxation and government incentives.

    Show me a single Democrat running for the office of President who is not proposing very, very serious tax increases in the name of social programs.

    Contrast this against the current President, who has decreased regulation and provided incentives for business investment and fund repatriation from foreign sources.

    You seem to be making the comparison that a Bernie Sanders and a Donald Trump would be somehow the equivalent of each other with respect to the economy, which is a false argument.

    We deserve better? Yes, we do.

    Like

    • John Dungan says:

      And, again, whoever this person is, ignores the question, and pushes a boring partisan agenda! The question from Brutus was concerning the government (that’s us, remember?), and did not specify any particular political party! As for you over the top request that he “Show me a single Democrat running for the office of President who is not proposing very, very serious tax increases in the name of social programs, stop and think for a minute! No, better yet, you show ME a single Democrat running for office who has actually said they want to raise taxes! Show me when they said or wrote any such thing! Yes, they want to improve social programs, but the ones I have heard from all say that we need to re-apportion those taxes now being spent on making rich folks richer to helping our fellow citizens! That does not mean increasing taxes!

      Like

      • anonymous says:

        Bernie Sanders has stated tax increases publicly as well as in plans on his website.

        In addition to the wealth tax on the wealthy in your post Sanders also stated a 4% tax on Americans earning over $29,000 and a new tax on employers.

        Like

      • Anonymous says:

        Every Democrat running for President today has publicly stated they will raise taxes. If your entire basis for argument rests on a falsehood you have nothing to say.

        If you like taxes so much there is nothing stopping you from sending extra money to the government.

        My guess is you think taxes should be higher for OTHER people. Practice what you preach. Until then, preach less and pay more taxes.

        Like

      • Ticked off taxpayer says:

        And John’s comment illustrates why people drink the socialist Koolaid. Back when I was young and foolish, a CEO pointed out to me that every politician who promises to raise taxes on the rich to pay for a social safety net inevitably funds it by raising taxes on the middle class. Because the middle class is the tax engine of the economy. Taxing the rich heavily doesn’t raise nearly the total amount of dollars needed, because sheer numbers of rich aren’t that large. Conversely, the middle class is big enough that a smaller tax increase raises far more revenue. Another inequality, is that most in the middle class have limited ability to shelter their income from new taxes, while the rich can employ tax lawyers or in the worst case (think that co-founder of Facebook who moved to Singapore for better tax treatment before FB went public), can move somewhere else. That was in the 80s and I’ve watched a number of “we’ll tax the rich” promises, and that earlier conversation has always proven true. Politicians who promise tax reapportionment to have the rich pay more, inevitably end up announcing they have to raise taxes on the middle class too to get enough revenue to keep their promises. Student loan forgiveness (which will include all the electronic toys those students bought with their student loan credit cards back when they saw the loan as free money) and “free” healthcare will cost the middle class more than anyone imagines.

        Like

  4. anon says:

    Your statement that Brutus was somehow making the comparison that a Bernie Sanders and a Donald Trump would be somehow the equivalent of each other is specious. If you read this column with any regularity, you know that is not even close to reality. Even when someone points out that both sides can sometimes be wrong on an issue, some people simply want to engage in partisan bickering. That’s what’s wrong with country right now. No one has any interest in finding common ground.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Anonymous says:

      is his statement today somehow predicated on other statements he has made in the past?

      if not, he directly says that both conservative and liberal speakers make similar comments about tax incentives. therefore he directly compares the two and finds similarity.

      if something he said in the past is relevant, it mus be somehow revealed in what he says today. otherwise my statement stands, and there is no rational comparison regarding sanders and trump.

      it is literally socialism vs capitalism. if you don’t like that, misconstruing my statements doesn’t help your argument, it only weakens your ability to debate.

      Like

  5. reality says:

    politicians see promises of tax cuts as incentives for voters to vote for them

    Like

  6. Anonymous says:

    bernie sanders is the leader of the democrat primaries and represents the future of the democrat party.

    you cannot be a socialist and complain about taxes at the same time.

    as socialists, you should celebrate taxes and be happy to pay them, no matter what they are for. everything for the state!

    Like

Leave a Reply -- you do not have to enter your email address

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: