Can Republicans Explain Why Higher Taxes Are Bad?

[jaysunb]

The Republican presidential candidates seem to be assuming that their Democratic rivals are going to push for repeal of all the Bush tax cuts. That's why they are always talking about a potential $2 trillion-plus tax hike when those reductions expire at the end of 2010. More likely, Democrats will call for only the tax cuts on wealthier Americans to be repealed—such as raising the top rate from 35 percent to 40 percent—and for keeping most of the middle-class tax cuts, including rate reductions and a higher child tax credit.

So Republicans will have to explain why a tax hike on "the rich" is a bad idea that will hurt average Americans. Making that task more difficult is the fact that many Americans probably associate the 1990s with an economic boom despite—maybe even because of—the Clinton tax hike in 1993. I have yet to hear any GOP contender really address this issue. I gave Rudy Giuliani a chance in our recent chat, but I'm not sure his answer did the trick. Here is how Giuliani economic adviser Steve Forbes, the magazine publisher and former presidential candidate, tackled the issue in an interview with me last weekend:

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2007/8/29/can-republicans-explain-why-higher-taxes-are-bad.html

[RC]

1. Ask the anti tax people just how they are going to pay for bu$h's invasion.

Running up huge debts and cutting taxes at the same time? It is like being down sized to burger flipper and going out and buying a new house. That is what this country did. We had better start working on the bill and the sooner the better.

[doc03]

2. Gee, don't you know when you cut

taxes revenues increase. If we completely eliminated taxes there would be no deficit.

[HughBeaumont]

3. More like buying a McMansion when you're on UI.

I think Pukes believe Magic Debt Fairies are going to pay it off.

Oh well, if not them, our kids.

[jaysunb]

4. "Magic Debt Fairies" LOL !

too funny :rofl:

[HughBeaumont]

14. Just the phrase BEGS for a photoshop.

Unfortunately, I can't afford Photoshop. :(

[Selatius]

5. They will use the Reaganomics model (aka supply side or trickle down model) to say it's bad

Reaganomics basically says that if you tax the richest people the most, then they won't have as much money to spend on creating more jobs by starting new businesses. If we assume this is true, then the best way to stimulate an economy is by cutting taxes on the wealthiest in the economy.

The opposite assumption says that the best way to stimulate the economy is to put money into the pockets of people who need it most, money that comes from taxes on rich people in the form of social programs. Then the working poor and the middle class have the wherewithal to purchase more goods and services, which leads to lower unemployment as firms have to hire extra people to handle the extra orders.

The latter assumption is the basic foundation behind FDR's New Deal programs and Johnson's Great Society programs.

[jaysunb]

6. Your'e right, but

I wonder will Democrats ever learn to frame this message in the way you have.....

[Selatius]

10. They won't learn, because they're divided on the issue.

See the differences between liberal Democrats and conservative Democrats on the issue. They don't see eye-to-eye, if you get what I mean, and they never will, and the problem has grown worse since Republicans have moved even further right, forcing more and more middle of the road Republicans into the Democratic Party.

[mudesi]

7. Supply side economics has been discredited

Of course, the people who benefit from it (ie, the rich) are the ones who control the message, which is what happens when you allow corporations to run the country.

[Selatius]

9. Yes, it was simply a repackaging of the old trickle down economic model

It simply got a new name, a new look, and a marketing budget for the masses to consume.

[Poiuyt]

11. I call it "Trickle Up" economics

[Selatius]

12. More like Mississippi River flowing backward.

Because such policies rapidly impoverish a lot of people when you remove the social programs. Just look at the wealth gap in countries like Brazil.

[HughBeaumont]

15. "Challenge Pissing" Economics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sZuN0xXWLc

[BlooInBloo]

8. Of course they can. To them, taxes take money from white folks, and give it to black folks....

... They'll *say* other things, of course, but just a lie-that-everyone-knows-but-refuses-to-point-out.

[Cha]

13. repukes will lie.. automatic.

I think it feeds the greed of their constituents.

[jaysunb]

17. more like the needs of their corporate masters...

although the tributary picks up the haters who think as poster # 8 pointed out, will some how take money from poor whites and give it to poor blacks.
Dean tried to get this point across, and it was one reason for his quick "execution." :evilfrown:

[treestar]

16. Because God forbid, they might be used to give the poor a leg up

Rather then enriching military contractors.

:sarcasm: