The One Certainty About the Next President

Comments (5)

  1. Steve Kauffman says:

    Martin: Even you are missing the boat. How about creating jobs as an agenda for a candidate?
    Go to my website: to see Seven Plans to Create Jobs and Cut Costs. Feel free to use one or all of them as your idea; or variations on a theme. This is what I am suggesting to Jim Webb.


    George C. Reply:

    You stole my thunder, my first thought was that raising taxes OR reducing spending is not a solution to the real problem. The real problem is failing to produce products and services needed by the world. Concentrate on production and jobs for people who are educated and want to demonstrate their skills, and the money problems will be a simple matter of budgeting responsibly. The rest will take care of itself.


  2. RPhillips says:

    Two problems with this scenario. First, the author says not enough cuts can be made in discretionary spending to stem the rise in the deficit. Most of the cuts must come in discretionary spending–we must cut the actual spending, and not in small amounts, either.

    The Government has to decide to get out of whole areas of american life the Cold War, Great Society Programs, and New World Order have led to as a result of past policies The government must get smaller and spend less money rather than try to grow the economy to keep or even reduce the government’s share of the economy.

    Blaming Social Security for the deficit is an outright lie, and Paul Ryan and other “budget hawks” lost all credibility with me when they created the lie.

    Most of the cuts can and must come from discretionary funding because of the size and scope the Federal Government has scope. We have created a government too big to pay for, and too many people want to fix the problem by saving the Government instead of reducing it.

    Two, the author wants to tackle the deficit by raising taxes, not cutting the size of the federal government. There are actually some areas taxes should be raised–but she doesn’t mention them.

    We should tax corporate mergers. In a healthy economy, businesses grow through better quality and price and growing themselves. In the Economy we have witnessed and encouraged for some thirty years, Businesses grow by taking on debt, buying out the competition, and cutting payrolls. Any corporations of significant size–Say Time Warner and CNN–who agree to takeovers by merger or buyout–should face significant merger taxes, payable at time of transaction, of say 40% of the value, no discounts for debt. That would bring in taxes and discourage these atrocious buyouts we still read about all the time.

    We should also get out of the free trade deals with “emerging economies” which make it so profitable for US firms to move their manufacturing overseas and send the cheap goods back here free of import duties. Put significant import duties on all articles from economies with lower standards of living than the US. That will create domestic industries and american jobs and higher prosperity levels in the US.

    As for taxing retirement accounts, increasing the income tax, or a “fair tax”–national sales tax–forget them entirely.

    There is one tax I would greatly like to see repealed for good. The Estate Tax should be repealed. Too many businesses, radio, TV, and Newspapers rooted in their local communities and locally owned have had to be sold to pay estate taxes when the head of the family died. Most of the time, bit corporations have ended up as owners, thus concentrating economic power in fewer hands.

    I have two examples relating to the Estate Tax, both Sports franchises. Rankin Smith, an Atlanta Insurance Executive, created the Atlanta Falcons Football, and the family owned it until he died. The family wanted to keep the team, but were unable to do so. They had to sell it to pay the estate taxes. The buyer was a billionaire co-founder of Home Depot.

    However, during the ten years or so the Estate Tax was repealed, the family which owns the New York Yankees fared better. The owner died, and without any estate taxes, the family did not have to sell the Yankees, and still own the team as far as I know. Obama, of course, reinstated the Estate Tax when he became President.

    The author of this article, however, can take some comfort. Both Bush 3 or Clinton 2 will be loyal administrators of the Status Quo, and business will continue as it is going now.


  3. jrj90620 says:

    Like the idea of taxing debt. Don’t like the idea of ending charity tax deductions. How about ending this nonsense of selling home every 2 years, tax free? I have cousin who owned about 5 homes, he rented out. He has sold all, every 2 years, tax free. We should go back to letting a primary home owner put the proceeds in his next home for tax delay.


  4. M.L. McDonald says:

    I’m not by any means an economist but common sense tells us that getting ‘rid’ of thousands of new organizations in the government would negate billions of dollars.


Add Comment