For Tax Day, a Debate of Spending Cuts v. Tax Cuts

Happy Tax Day (or not).


Back when I interned on Capitol Hill in Rep. Dan Miller's office (R-FL-13), I had a front seat to a debate between House and Senate staffers over Tax Cuts and Spending Cuts (this is after Congress went home for the day). One of the debaters at the time was a guy by the name of Matt Kibbee. I hope he goes far.

The Senate (Republican) staffers argued for Tax Cuts and the House (Republican) Staffers went for Spending Cuts.




In the end, President Clinton backed tax cuts in his second term. In his first term, under his first budget, Clinton started with raising taxes.

If a Democratic President can go from Raising Taxes to Tax Cuts, why not other Democrats?

Let's start with a point of fact: If Government spending and regulation outweighs Private spending, nothing moves. Don't believe me? Take a tour of Wilshire Boulevard and Ventura Boulevard. After dealing with multiple potholes, you will see many, many empty storefronts and For Sale signs on Office Buildings.



That's what overeegulation and excess Government spending will get you (Hint: the all Democratic Los Angeles City Council has not fixed any potholes on Wilshire or Ventura Boulevards).



Here is what the Government Debt Limit is Now:

And here is a comparison chart for all Presidents since Carter:

Finally, here is the Unemployment rates (Reagan v. Obama first two years):

Now, let's return to the Cannon House Office Building and have the debate in the modern era.



The concept of Spending Cuts is that the Government has taken on more then it can afford.  During the Bush fils Administration, the war budget was considered off-budget (Budget rules allow this) so that Government spending would not overwhelm the private sector.



President Obama's first movement was to put them on-budget, and the economy, already in free fall, continued to crash.


Where do spending cuts come from?  There are 13 Appropriation subcommittees and multiple agencies under the Executive Branch, some even repeating others (Or the Department of Redundancy department).  The Congress can cut and so can the Presidents own budget.


 But the Left, who believes more Government is the solution, can never find anything to get rid of.

Not even corruption.


Now let's go to the Senate side of the debate, Tax Cuts and why they help.


The idea of (modern) Tax Cuts come from that hard core Conservative President, JFK.  It worked in his time, then his predecessor added The Great Society to the budget (the budget process was reformed on the Hill under Nixon) and the Vietnam War, and welcome to Inflation and Stagflation. (and multiple Oil shocks like today -- the more things change the more they stay the same)


The concept of Tax Cuts is that business' will hire and people will invest if the Tax Burden is lifted. 


With Tax Cuts, commerce succeeds and more taxes get paid.  Without commerce, no State can survive.  Under the Obama Administration, the State weighs more then private commerce, so why should Private business' hire with all the regulations and taxes? 


Again, walk down Wilshire Boulevard and tell me high taxes and regulation works well.


Tax Cuts and Spending Cuts are the carrot and stick approach to keeping Government under control.


What does an out of control Government look like?


Soviet Russia (or even Tsarist Russia) and Cuba -- anyplace where the individual can be destroyed, with impunity by the State.


Think of a Caesar or a dictator:  If they say they don't like one subsection of society, what percentage of that society survives to create and grow?  The Government that can give life can also take it too; Hence the Conservative philosophy.

My questions: If you grow Government, will commerce survive? If you cut Government taxes and regulation, will more storefronts open on Wilshire Boulavard? And finally: Why oppose Tax Cuts? 
Happy Tax Day!