Skip to main content

Fiscal Cliff

I wrote this and posted it at my other blog (davew0958.wordpress.com), deciding to re-post it here:

I have heard more than one commentator say that the American people expect the various factions of Congress to “get along.” I’m not sure I buy that, especially when “getting along” means compromising on core beliefs that many consider too vital to budge on, even a little. It may just be that the American voter is more responsible for this pending ‘cliff’ than the members of Congress are.
The big issue here (for Democrats, at least) is the desire to raise taxes on those making more than $250,000 per year. Their argument is that the wealthiest Americans aren’t paying their “fair share” and the majority of our citizens think they should pay more. While I don’t doubt that most Americans think those making over 250K should pay more, I must point out that most Americans don’t make that amount –so it’s easy to finger point and act like it should be no big deal –when it’s not coming out of your wallet.
On the other hand, Republicans think that over-spending is the problem here, not revenue -and the rich already pay the lion’s share of our country’s revenue. They accuse the Democrats of not being willing to compromise on entitlement reforms.
So where is the truth? As always, I suspect it is somewhere in the middle. I do not, for one minute, believe that letting the tax cuts expire for the wealthiest Americans will somehow cause the rich to suddenly decide to stop expanding. Wealthy people don’t create jobs for some philanthropic reason, or specifically because they are paying less taxes, they do so because it serves their bottom line. Nothing saintly about it. Just capitalism, plain and simple. History proves this to be true. Higher taxes will not stifle expansion. In fact, wealthy citizens may actually invest more to increase their revenues to counter losses from additional taxes. What will happen if we fail to extend tax cuts for common, ordinary people who drive this economy through spending, thereby indirectly employing people to create goods and  services to meet demand, is that they will pull back their limited resources from spending and investing to meet the added demand of Uncle Sam’s voracious appetite for spending of late.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Remembering Why

I was watching Bill O'Reilly this evening as he interviewed Tony Orlando, who has agreed to perform at the Armed Services Ball. Not only is he doing it for the veterans, he is doing it for America -- out of respect for our tradition of a peaceful transfer of power. He made it clear that, had Hillary won and asked him to perform, he would do the same. It is not a partisan thing. It's about America, not an individual. Bravo, Tony. A true patriotic American.

The Value of a Letter

I can't say with any certainty when the last time I wrote a letter to anybody was. I can tell you that I remember the last several emails I have sent or received -- but to actually write and mail a letter? I have given this a little thought today as I heard someone talking about it on a Christian radio station I favor and listen to very often. He mentioned that he cannot recall anyone ever telling him that they received his email "at the right time" or how much it really meant to them. I am sure that some of us can say we have received such a response. However, as I reflect on that, those times are few and far between.

In thinking about the time and effort it takes to put pen to paper and then actually stick on a stamp on it and mail it, I can see where it could well mean much more to the recipient than a simple text or email. Perhaps that is what I like so much about getting Christmas cards -- especially those with notes in them.

Just thinking...

Think, not react...

The 'action-reaction' scenario that has been playing out between progressives and conservatives is a situation that is becoming increasingly counter-productive and harmful. This is obviously not something new; the battle between left and right has been raging for a long time and those flames were also well-fanned by the previous administration and ineffective congress. Sadly, what happens is a loss of focus on issues that we should be working together to solve and increase in counter-productive squabbling. The level of immaturity being witnessed as coming from our 45th president is unfortunate. Less use of Twitter would serve him better, provided he actually took the time to build better relationships with key figures in the media. Some of it has been nothing short of childish and the sort of thing I might have engaged in as a 12 year old, were Twitter in existence then.

President Trump's tendency to engage in knee-jerk reactions is unfortunate. A case in point is his exec…