As I wrote about earlier, the House passed a $51.8 billion tax increase, ostensibly to pay for domestic spending priorities in the Iraq War Supplemental.
To get an idea of how much money this is, I went on over to the IMF website and used their handy dandy report maker on Global financial statistics. The $51.8 billion Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR) says won’t be missed much, is more than the Gross Domestic Products of 2/3 of the world. The Democrat tax increase amounts to roughly the entire economy of Croatia.
Why stop there? The Democrats want to pass a budget raising taxes by $683 billion. Or to put it a different way, slightly larger than the economy of Turkey and more than the economies of 165 out of 181 countries.
Posted in Democrats, Taxes | | Write a Letter to the Editor
About 5 months in Iraq right? Why bitch so much about spending that money at home, where it can help Americans, but them support the spending on that much cash, in less than half a year, across the globe.
Please don’t tell me that money is doing anything to ‘protect’ us either.
Whatever we do we better not balance the budget to protect the dollar. $135 and counting…
You are a sheep.
Alright, I have been under the weather so I apologize for not responding sooner Colby.
The first flaw in your argument, I think but I might be wrong, is that you are talking about government spending. I am talking about taxing rates. The problem I had with the supplemental is that the Democrats are trying to pull $51 billion out of an already struggling economy. That is $51 billion that cannot be reinvested to generate new revenue. You are talking about dollars that already allocated and spent regardless of tax rates.
Next, as soon as I wrote this I knew someone would come back with the old “guns versus butter” argument. Which is what I think is what I think you are trying to get at…again correct me if I am wrong.
Basically that theory holds true as long as a nation has a controlled economy. In such economies, every dollar spent on defense is a dollar diverted from domestic needs. However, when a country has a free market, the butter end of the equation is provided by the open market not the government. It still has some relevance, but it is not the 1 to 1 tradeoff assumed in the theory. Domestic priorities will be taken care of the private market freeing the government to focus on the gun end without compromising the butter.
As to Cleveland, you can do better - sheep, is that you got? Let me know when you want to increase domestic oil supply and we can talk about that $135.
