Thursday, February 12, 2009

The Only Real Stimulus: Real Tax Cuts


At 2/12/2009 4:49 PM, Blogger OBloodyHell said...

Well, I wouldn't go quite so far as to say that time-limited cuts don't do well, too. Look at the Bush cuts from several years ago -- they stimulated the economy quite well, even though, at the time, it wasn't certain that they would last for more than a couple years.

It's more a matter of cuts being at least for an extended time as opposed to a one-time payout. If multiple paychecks for months benefit, that's different from one or two paychecks looking better.

And you'll have better luck pounding that kind of idea (sustained, at least for a time) through a libtard opposer's head than you will "permanent" cuts, even if that's your long term (and sensible) goal.

At 2/12/2009 5:12 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It seems that most Obama voters have absolutely no idea what they are voting for. When given a choice, they reject his plans in favor of tax cuts.

At 2/12/2009 8:02 PM, Blogger PeakTrader said...

According to the BEA:


Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property
located in the United States -- increased at an annual rate of 2.8 percent in the second quarter of 2008, (that is, from the first quarter to the second quarter), according to final estimates released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the first quarter, real GDP increased 0.9 percent.

The acceleration in real GDP growth in the second quarter primarily reflected a larger decrease in imports than in the first quarter, an acceleration in exports, a smaller decrease in residential fixed investment,
an acceleration in nonresidential structures, an upturn in state and local government spending, and an acceleration in PCE that were partly offset by larger decreases in inventory investment and in equipment and software.

National Economic Trends-Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis shows from the first quarter of 2008 to the second quarter of 2008, Final Sales increased from 0.89% to 4.33%; Inventories fell from negative 0.02% to negative 1.50%; Consumption increased from 0.61% to 0.87%.

At 2/13/2009 4:53 AM, Blogger Free2Choose said...

@ Anon 11:30pm

Dude, how old are you? Seriously? Aren't you the guy who used to get picked on and have your ass whipped on a regular basis when you were in school? That would explain your bitterness, your misplaced arrogance, and why you're so willing to insult others from behind an "anonymous" facade. Let the hurt go, man. Noone can take your lunch money here. A civil counterargument will suffice.

At 2/13/2009 12:11 PM, Blogger Michael said...

It is disturbing that a qualified economist believes tax cuts are the end-all be-all solution for poor economic times. Mark Perry certainly is unwavering. Of course tax cuts make sense if you deny there is a problem with the current economic situation. What I'd like to hear from this blog are the things that tax cuts can't solve. Is there ANYTHING tax cuts can't solve? When you only want tax cuts it's easy to make those the solution for everything. Fortunately, this view is not universally respected in government.

At 2/13/2009 1:06 PM, Blogger Free2Choose said...

" Is there ANYTHING tax cuts can't solve?"

Tax cuts can't solve wealth distribution problems. It's hard to "spread the wealth around" if you can't take money from productive members of society who do pay taxes and give it as "tax rebates" to less productive members who don't.

At 2/13/2009 1:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for this chart, Mark! I know we all appreciate the great work all those Bush tax cuts did for our economy. Things are awesome now!

If it were a just world, Mark and all the people who think like him would live under the Bush economy. The rest of us, and the people caught in the middle through no fault of their own, could live in the Clinton economy.

At 2/13/2009 1:47 PM, Blogger Free2Choose said...

"If it were a just world, Mark and all the people who think like him would live under the Bush economy."

I'm not sure where the Bush/Clinton comparison is valid. In fact, the article the host posted refers to a tax rebate that was issued during the Bush administration.

I know it's a lot easier to make it a Republican/Democrat thing as if all economists are Republican (actually, Tyler Cowen has some interesting research which reveals that most economists are moderate Democrats). Plus, doing it your way means you don't have to do all that cumbersome and irritating critical thinking.

I think the consensus is that both the legislative and executive branches in the last 8 years have spent money like a sailor in a whore house. Now I may just be a dumb old country boy, but I don't believe anyone here thinks that MORE government spending is somehow going to undo that.

At 2/16/2009 4:58 PM, Blogger juandos said...

Hey anon, do some homework: Ten Myths About the Bush Tax Cuts


Post a Comment

<< Home