Beck's plan to eliminate the debt: Cut unspecified "spending," cut taxes on "entrepreneurs," institute regressive VAT
November 24, 2009 5:34 pm ET
From the November 24 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
Steal a bunch of underwear.
????
PROFIT!"
Fixed.
I just caught a couple minutes of his show... He was saying how newscorp hasn't had a christmas party in two years to curb spending... How much does Beck make a year again? $20 million? more? It reminds me of how O'Reilly always says that Beck has 'the every-man image.' When his behavior, and salary blatantly challenge that assessment...
HOW IS HE NOT UNIVERSALLY PERCIEVED AS A JOKE? I weep for the country.
Anyway, cutting taxes for entrepreneurs doesn't really help the debt at all. The Laffer Curve doesn't apply almost ever and cutting taxes on entrepreneurs would just create more debt. We can argue if the policy is good or bad but it doesn't decrease debt since it's not going to spur enough growth to make the loss in revenue worth it (I can guarantee this based on history). Now, a regressive VAT tax (despite the fact those European Socialists have it, Beck supports it?); but that too isn't going to bring down the deficit. Wealth is so concentrated among the top 10% (or 1% now heh) and because that bracket puts a large sum of their money into investment (i.e. not taxed via VAT) that the tax base would decrease dramatically. Additionally, this would largely be shifted to the poor and middle class who spend a large amount of their income on consumption, unlike the hyper-wealthy, and they would all see an indirect tax increase. I'm assuming Beck wants a regressive VAT in place of income taxes since I can't imagine Mr. "taxes are evil" would want both.
His plan sounds great. Less revenue and the people who drive consumption (the middle class / poor) will be taxed more. That sounds like a great economic plan.
My primary argument against this is because we do not have a strong welfare state like many European countries the tax will be a huge burden on the poor and middle class since it is largely regressive to the lower-income because they use nearly all of their income on consumption rather than savings and investment. Yes, it would grow the economy; but the middles class and the poor would struggle even more. Furthermore, based on international experience, the VAT tax growth argument doesn't work and always takes in less revenue than an income tax which is why it won't solve the budget concerns - at least when a VAT is not coupled with some type of income tax on the wealthy.
If we had a stronger welfare system to aid the poor and middle class (like Europe), coupled with a tax on the top earners a VAT would work fine for growing the economy and solving the deficit problem. However, I know Glenn Beck isn't suggesting a tax on the rich plus a consumption tax along with a stronger welfare state; which is why his won't work.
K.I.S.S. principle, people. It works for the Army, which these clowns claim to love.
~
The best way (the proven way) to reduce the debt is to invest in the leading edge of industry. We need to give our children the mechanism to pay back the debt we have, as we did when we built the railroads, the interstate highway system, the space program, etc.
And, if you could get an honest answer out of Donald Trump, he would tell you that there are two times when it is a good idea to spend money: when you are very rich, and when you are broke. By spending money when you are broke, you do two things: you give your creditors a vested interest in your success and you give yourself the future engine for your own economic success.
Lowering taxes does not produce jobs, it merely increases profit.
Like the "cut the fat" promise made by every GOP politician for the past fifty years- total, unadulterated BS.
Another right-wing corporate puppet Becky is.
I love these 3 things - cut spending to make sure obama doesnt have any money to actually do anything to help the country in any way. Cut taxes because Beck wants a tax cut himself or Murdoch does or both which actually adds to the debt but continues to subtract from the money obama would have to implement anything. And a fund just to pay off the debt which would even further reduce any money the government could have to I dont know... try to improve the economy maybe.
Cutting taxes alone will NOT reduce unemployment by any significant degree. I agree taxes shouldnt be raised but they shouldnt be lowered esp on the rich. And frankly, real economists would not even think about reducing the deficit in a depression or recession in which unemployment is over 10 percent. Such mundane things should be addressed by curbing the recession itself, improving unemployment, improving economy and stregnthening the dollar. I am not saying let the deficit spiral out of control but this is the last thing we should be worrying about in a crisis. Bush never gave a crap about the deficit during rapid growth. He actually vastly increased it to current levels. Again, this is a scare tactic to turn focus away from the pressing matters at hand.