Cordoba House and the Feds

The debate over the proposed Cordoba House drags on as factions on the right make cries of Muslim arrogance, parts of the left cry of right ignorance and those of us who believe in freedom standby as the two sides squabble over what should be a non-issue- and the debt continues to pile on. There really should be no debate over the issue, especially not at the Federal level. The Feds have no jurisdiction over New York City zoning laws; not to mention that disallowing an Islamic place of worship when there are not one, but two churches in the same area, violates the Bill of Rights and is outright unjust (as is even the thought that the 9/11 attacks are synonymous with the Islamic religion.)

That put aside though, there really are bigger things for the Federal government to worry about. From the recovery that never was to high unemployment to debt that just keeps adding up at almost every level of government- we have a lot of problems. But DC lives in a bubble and despite calls for change two years ago by the Democrats and now by Republicans, it is still politics as usual.

Posted in Government Spending, Politics | Leave a comment

The broken window fallacy

This is an excellent video on the broken window fallacy. It is fairly short, but does a great job at explaining one of the most prevalent fallacies in modern economics discussions:

Posted in Economic Theory | Leave a comment

Raising the debt ceiling

Washington is at it again with yet another debt ceiling debate. After the administration’s rampant spending over the last year, we once more find ourselves very close to the maximum legal level of national debt. With that, we again see those who are making pleas that the limit needs to be raised in order to avoid a default on national debt. This argument has been used again and again over the past few years, every time yielding the same result- increasing the ceiling. How long will this illogical argument suffice?

If we continue to increase the debt ceiling every time we approach it, then what is the point of even having such a limit? Considering where we are heading right now, I think it is pretty clear that a stand on the national debt ceiling should be taken now as opposed to later. Instead of raising the ceiling, spending can be cut in order to keep the debt below our current legal limit. In fact, without a firm debt ceiling, it doesn’t look like those is D.C. looking for quick political points will ever stop the spending- that is, until it is too late of course. We need to take a stand on this debt and we need to let the politicians know it. We need to let them know, that this is no longer acceptable:

debt ceiling change

Image credit goes to CNN.

Posted in Government Spending | Leave a comment

Stimulus: projections vs. reality

Earlier this year, the stimulus was pushed through Congress and quickly signed by President Obama in what supporters deemed a necessary step and one which would further recovery. Just as with the current healthcare debate and most spending plans, there were projections created by the government during the debate process. Below is a projection created by the administration’s economic team back in February concerning the affect the stimulus would have on unemployment as opposed to without it:
stimulus unemployment projections

The maroon dots are the actual unemployment numbers (thank you to innocentbystanders.com for adding those in.) As you can clearly see, the predictions were drastically off. History has shown that government projections are often overly optimistic- social security and medicare being perhaps the most titanic examples. This graph doesn’t tell us what the unemployment number would’ve been had the stimulus not been passed (and we will never know the exact figure), but it is quite clear that the stimulus has not been able to curtail unemployment as expected by Washington economists. It also shows how little grasp many politicians and politically-sided economists actually have of the market.

With unemployment currently over 10%, the argument can be made that the stimulus has in fact not helped the situation. Either way, we are still left with the ~$780 billion tab that came with the legislation and it is clear the government was wrong in its outlook.

The monstrous miscalculation by the Obama administration should really serve as a caution for citizens in that we can not simply take what the government tells us as truth- especially when it comes to projections concerning markets. Government predictions are often wrong, and in some cases distorted due to political reasons (such as trying to push through legislation.) This is why it is important to consider several different sides when it comes to any government legislation, especially massive spending increases such as the stimulus, bailouts, or state-subsidized healthcare.

Posted in Barack Obama, Economic Analysis, Government Spending | Leave a comment

Remember the Laffer curve

As President Obama continues to push the expansion of government, his plans to raise taxes may not be too far off. Obama has had his eyes of raising certain taxes from the moment he began his campaign and he will surely try to follow up on what he said. He believes that these tax increases will help reduce the deficit by paying for his massive programs. There is one problem though: in many cases they won’t.

It all comes down to the Laffer curve and the fact that increasing taxes does not always mean tax revenue increases. In fact, it can often decrease tax revenue by forcing some firms to leave the market, hence reducing the overall market production by whatever those firms produced and in turn, actually reducing tax revenue by the difference in the amount that firms which decide to stay in the market pay subtracted by the total tax amount that the firms who left paid with the previous, lower tax rate.

One of the taxes that Obama plans to increase is the capital gains tax. That tax though, is past the optimal tax revenue mark on the Laffer curve, or at best is sitting right at the peak at the current 15% rate. This is evident because when Bill Clinton reduced the tax rate from 28% to 20% in 1997 the capital gains tax revenue actually increased. The same happened when George W. Bush further reduced it to 15%. On the other side, the tax was increased in the 1980s and the tax revenue from it actually decreased.

Obama has been questioned about this before and he still chooses to increase the tax for purposes of “fairness.” First of all, not only is he punishing the 100 million people in this nation who own stocks, but he is also decreasing government revenue. The logic behind it? He claims “fairness.” How he figures hurting about at third of Americans during a time like this and at the same time decreasing tax revenue and increasing spending is justified? I don’t know.

The worst part of this situation is that it is not only the capital gains tax that is in this situation. Many of our taxes are beyond the optimal tax revenue amount they should be at and increasing them will only hurt how much the government can take from taxes. In fact, many companies are already threatening to leave American markets if Obama imposes tax hikes on them. Among them is Microsoft, who’s CEO Steve Ballmer recently said that the company would move some employees offshore if Congress enacts the President’s proposal to increase taxes on foreign profits. Ballmer isn’t alone in the software industry, with nine other software executives also fighting back the hikes.

These tax increases will only hurt our economy and in many cases they will even decrease government tax revenue. Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute recently said, “Even if all of Obama’s tax wishes comes true, the revenues won’t come close to satisfying his appetite for bigger government”- figure in the fact that many firms will even leave the market and production and sales will suffer as a result, and the argument that these tax hikes will make things worse is very reasonable.

Posted in Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Economic Analysis, Economic Theory, George W. Bush | Leave a comment