WHAT? “Raising Taxes by 80% Won’t Impact Economic Growth.”

WHAT?  “Raising Taxes by 80% Won’t Impact Economic Growth.”

Watching liberal academic justify social injustice is a cross between a comedy show and a horror movie.

What is most scary about the notion that “raising taxes by 80% won’t impact economic growth” is the sense of government entitlement to your property.  We’ve all heard the example of poor performance by government of a task that is done far better in the private sector (Veterans Administration, Social Security, and he list goes on), so why do ne’er-do-well liberals insist on the social injustice of confiscation to achieve what they think should be done?

In his article that reports on the DNC Platform meeting, writer Jack Heretik in his June 9th Washington Free Beacon article summarized the testimony of one such academic, who has likely never worked in the real world known as the private sector producing something other than a policy proposal paper.

A witness appearing before the Democratic National Committee’s Platform Committee on Thursday said that raising taxes by 80 percent would not impact economic growth.

Heather Boushey, the chief economist and executive director of the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, said that raising taxes to nearly twice the current level on some would not hurt America’s economic growth according to a paper by a colleague of hers.

“And let me end this by noting Emmanuel Saez, one of the nation’s foremost tax experts, is on my steering committee and he did a paper with a couple of his colleagues a few years ago, really documenting that we could, and get this, hold onto your seats, raise taxes at the top by upwards of 80 percent and not have any negative effect on economic growth,” Boushey said.

“Now, granted, that’s an empirical paper, it’s modeling exercise, but I think that what we’re learning from the most cutting edge, serious, empirical research in economics is that there’s a lot of room to do more at the top.”

Many Democrats want to raise taxes on the wealthy, and in some cases on other economic groups. This has been a key issue in the 2016 presidential election cycle.

Two principles here are most disturbing.  The first is in the liberal view, government can confiscate what it’s bureaucratic need dictates, as it sees fit.  Which is another way of saying, the government allows you to hold, not own property.

The other principle is the more you take from people, the better of they will be.  Say what?  Try telling a millennial, “Hand over their iPad or iPhone, and then tell them it’s ok, you’ll be better off without it.  Besides we need to have the money you would pay the cell phone carrier for service so we can give it to someone else.”  I’m thinking that wouldn’t go over too well.

The slight of hand trick that liberals attempt sooner or later -usually later- falls apart when people finally realize they’ve been had and that what government took from them to maintain government jobs which produce thing but headaches and barriers, could have remained with them to pay for goods and services that actually do create value that they get to define.

Oh and for the “feel the bern” crowd, There still is no free lunch, only economic slavery in the form of dependency.


This post was written by

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *