Thursday, October 18, 2012

Caaamper's Political Foray-Tax Rates, Binders & More

I’ve just been doing some research on this whole “lowering taxes to raise federal revenue” issue.  There’s been much bantering…rather harsh bantering…on whether this is a legitimate strategy or just smoke and mirrors.  The left side of the political spectrum in our society has adamantly painted Mitt Romney as a liar for even suggesting that it could be done.  So, I’ve done some digging around.

Who’s right?

Is Romney a liar?  Or, is Obama just oblivious to good tax policy?

Well, frankly, it depends on which economist you listen to.  I read several papers from seemingly reputable sources and the basic answers conflict.  Some papers support the concept and others dispute it.  Both make very plausible arguments.

So, to me, the bottom line is that good people can sincerely disagree on this issue and there is NO REASON to call one another liars over it!  What I’ve gleaned is that sometimes reduced rates can increase federal revenue because of changed practices of the taxed individuals plus spurred economic growth.  And, sometimes the opposite is true.  Each situation has to be taken as a unique set of factors that will result in a unique set of results of implemented tax policy.  Romney very well could increase federal revenue by lowering tax rates.  Maybe he won’t be able to do so, but it is quite possible and I think he is smart enough to get to the bottom of the idea.  To say that he is lying about the plan is not fair.

One thing I know is true is that you can’t spend yourself out of debt….which is what our current President is trying to do.

Now consider this example…simple as it is:  I once had a small lilac bush that I purchased and planted in my yard.  I kept it year after year, but it never took off and began to flourish.  Finally, I gave up and cut it down to the ground.  Funny thing though, all of the sudden it sprang to life.  It took a severe pruning to spur the growth.  That is a counter-intuitive fact of horticulture.  If you trim a plant back, it will spur increased growth and produce more of the actual plant than you would have otherwise had.  Each year, my dad would cut his grape arbor all the way back to the bare stems, and each year they would burst forth with new growth and a wealth of juicy fruit.

Sometimes, it pays to trim.  At least give the concept a fair listen and consideration.

Now, what about all those binders?  Binders of women?  Seems that’s all I’ve heard about since the last debate.  Come on!  What a bunch of blathering about nothing!  Let’s examine his point:  He came into office and wanted to enhance the number of women in state government.  An organization presented him with a binder or binders loaded with resumes’ of qualified women.  He utilized the resumes’ in his selection of candidates.  Where in the world is the terrible, horrible, nasty action, policy, or viewpoint hidden in there?  Seems to me that he was just trying to increase the impact and influence of women in the state government of Massachusetts.  Seems like a good thing to me.  Seems like he went out of his way to promote women in government.

So, I consider the binders controversy to be a grasping at straws in a blathering attempt at distraction.  There’s your smoke and mirrors.  A waste of time on an argument of nothingness.

Now, let’s talk gasoline prices.  Oh well, no need.  We know they are twice as high as they were four years ago…and that surely isn’t because the economy was so bad in 2008 or so good in 2012.

Another thing…

I fully believe that Candy Crowley tried to be fair and impartial.  I will give her the benefit of the doubt.  However, it was very obvious that she interrupted, shut down, and cut off Mitt Romney many more times than she did President Obama.  One report I heard said that she cut off Romney 28 times compared to Obama only 9 times.  I didn’t go back and “fact check” that, but based on my observation, I think it fairly accurate.  It may have been an unconscious slight based on her personal bias, but it was true none-the-less.

What I would really like to see is the two men locked alone in a room with no audience and no moderator for a couple of hours.  Turn on the cameras and the microphones.  Simply let them debate among themselves for two hours while the rest of us just listen in.  We’d see if they can be reasonable with one another.  We’d see if they would actually listen to one another.  Perhaps, we would get a chance to actually hear each man out…side by side.  That would be nice.

Short of that, we have only rhetoric and records.  I’ve seen the Obama record…I don’t like it.  Romney has been quite economically successful…I think we need some of that.

No….I think we need a lot of that.


  1. Mike,
    1) The truth that you can't spend your way to recovery/out of debt is the same truth that sometimes cutting taxes spurs growth. Same deal with economics - in fact, it got the US out of the Great Depression ...

    2) As to Mitt's "binders" - you neglected to mention that he misled the audience by saying he ASKED for the binders, when in fact, they were presented to him unasked. The real reason that "binders" has legs is because it's shorthand for his general cluelesness about women in the workforce. That is well covered in many spaces, and was illustrated by Mitt himself in the debate.

    3) Ms. Crowley cut Mitt off more times because he insisted on rebutting after his rebuttal time was done more times - and he did it aggressively.

  2. Recommended reading - are these really the skills you think the President needs?

    And are you willing to pay for more wars like Iraq - in lives and money? He seems bent on diving in to conflict zones with no thought to allies.

  3. Liz,
    I will acknowledge that in the world of macroeconomics some OCCASIONAL deficit spending might be okay. However, across both parties we have had almost continual deficit spending for decades and decades. The one exception would be Bill Clinton. I will give him props for that. However, our current president has taken deficit spending to a whole new level. You may think this is okay, but I strongly disagree.

    As for the binder thing, I'm not buying it. This is a waste of energy and no issue at all. Has anyone disputed his claim about putting more women in positions in his administration? Not that I've seen. This is an argument without substance and not worthy of pursuit. We can have an intelligent discussion and disagree about fiscal policy, but this "binder" thing isn't worth the breath anyone is giving it.

  4. This is my OPINION based on much reading and experiencing of the OBama political policy, along with some equally important personal points about him. 1st, he didn't sign up for Selective Service which is the law for every American male citizen at age 18. He was not born to two American citizens which is the Constitutional law in Article 2. He was a citizen of Indonesia which does not allow dual citizenship with any other country. He studied Marxism at Berkley, and since becoming president has repeatedly spoken of "spreadingg the wealth around" from the wealthy to the poor. This is not free enterprise or capitalism. This is at best socialism. He blatantly stated during his most recent State of the Union Adress that he was forced too use his executive powers to accomplish things because Congress either wouldn't do what he wanted or wouldn't do it fast enough. This is clearly an abuse of the Separation of Powers in the Constitution. He apologizes for America's Foreign Policy to our enemies, and doesnt keep us close to our best ally in the Middle East, Israel.
    He hs spent many hours of his time in office campaigning for his next four years while taking over free enterprise like the banks and the auto industry under government control. Finally, but perhaps most critically, he ramrodded through "OBAMACARE" which is the biggest go vernment power grab of all. I've already lost my Family Doctor because of its provisions. She couldn't afford to convert over to the electronic requirements. DON'T BE FOOLED! This information gathering to have everything you do classified under your Driver's License Number is not for your benefit. It is part of the government's control of any and all parts of your life.