A budget chat on MSN
Just had a 10 second chat with a friend about today's budget. Here's the entire thing:
It's a really simplistic look at things I know, but as we've been talking here about the "evils of capitalism" (in comments), I just thought I'd share.
The reason I support tax cuts is for this exact reason... to stimulate the economy, thus creating jobs, thus increasing government revenues, thus allowing for a better social spending, etc. It's a cyclical beast, and it has to start somewhere... cutting taxes is one way to do this.
Increasing social spending (ie. NDP budget, 2005) may help solve problems in the near term, but to really work on solving our long term issues, we need to strengthen our economic engine.
I, for one, am really glad we've got an economist for a PM.
"(Him) says:Commenters, go at it/me.
Am I the only one or do you agree with me that tax cuts will boost the economy?
(Me) Budget TODAY says:
I agree
(Me) Budget TODAY says:
Stimulate spending
(Me) Budget TODAY says:
More staff required to handle more spending
(Me) Budget TODAY says:
more people working
(Me) Budget TODAY says:
more tax revenue for the gov
(Me) Budget TODAY says:
less people on social assistance
(Me) Budget TODAY says:
win win win win situation
(Him) says:
Exactly...more staff means, more jobs, less unemployed. More tax payers, more money for governement spending.
(Me) Budget TODAY says:
Duh
(Him) says:
Why is it so hard for the liberals to understand?
It's a really simplistic look at things I know, but as we've been talking here about the "evils of capitalism" (in comments), I just thought I'd share.
The reason I support tax cuts is for this exact reason... to stimulate the economy, thus creating jobs, thus increasing government revenues, thus allowing for a better social spending, etc. It's a cyclical beast, and it has to start somewhere... cutting taxes is one way to do this.
Increasing social spending (ie. NDP budget, 2005) may help solve problems in the near term, but to really work on solving our long term issues, we need to strengthen our economic engine.
I, for one, am really glad we've got an economist for a PM.
posted by Christian Conservative @ 10:09 a.m.
8 Comments:
At Tue May 02, 11:40:00 a.m. EDT,
Blake Kennedy said…
Tax cuts only increase government revenue when tax rates are beyond the optimal revenue collection point on the "Laffer curve". If, in fact, taxation rates are on the left of the apex of the curve, i.e. less than the optimal rate, then government revenues will decrease. Where exactly we are in this country viz. the "Laffer curve" is difficult to determine.
At Tue May 02, 11:54:00 a.m. EDT,
Christian Conservative said…
Makes sense... hadn't heard of the "Laffer Curve" before, but it makes perfect sense.
I guess that's why the Tories are going after both the GST, small businesses, and, from what I hear, middle income tax brackets... those groups who earn and spend the most.
Guess we'll see after 4:00pm EDT today.
At Tue May 02, 12:29:00 p.m. EDT,
Blake Kennedy said…
Well, those are politically popular moves but they don't seem to be stimulating investment (in the economic sense, not the financial) or savings (again, in the economic sense), this seems to fuel almost entirely consumer spending, whereas this country badly is need of capital investment in pretty much every sector. Sigh.
At Tue May 02, 01:22:00 p.m. EDT,
Christian Conservative said…
We'll also have to see if the credits for kids sports equipment made it into the budget.
At Tue May 02, 01:44:00 p.m. EDT,
Blake Kennedy said…
Vicki:
No doubt it would, but I was strictly addressing the country's and the government's needs in my previous post. And everybody could say they could use tax relief, but I think at some point we need to look at actual sound policy as opposed to what will be popular.
Not that sound policy is in much danger of being discussed on a blog, but, still...
At Tue May 02, 05:56:00 p.m. EDT,
Christian Conservative said…
"Blake, all due respect..."
In keeping with Blake's encouragement to examine all issues and comments, I must ask the question... what, if any, "respect" is actually due to Blake? ;-)
At Tue May 02, 09:45:00 p.m. EDT,
Anonymous said…
That conversation looks familiar. :D
All I can say is, "Great job Mr. Harper!"
At Wed May 03, 01:41:00 a.m. EDT,
Blake Kennedy said…
"Blake, all due respect, but sometimes you sound very condescending."
Vicki, if that is the case, that's because I've studied economics at the university level, and am very familiar with what a challenging, deep, and difficult subject it is. I have a lot of respect for a guy like Stephen Harper, who has a graduate degree in the subject, but not much for the armchair experts. If that's condescending, well, that's condescending. I don't really care.
"what, if any, "respect" is actually due to Blake? ;-) "
Andrew, I would think a guy who talked about the impact of tax cuts on government revenue, yet had no idea what the Laffer curve was before this morning, would be a little less quick to ask questions like that. ;)
And my treatment at the hands of evangelicals obviously answers the question that most people believe I don't deserve much respect. Please refer to my avatar for my response to that attitude.
Funniest damned thing, though, last week I had dinner with a girl whose psyche was more or less shattered by evangelicalism, on whose mental state I wreaked havoc in high school as a fundamentalist, and yet, after enjoying a delightful dinner and bottle of wine with me, she has categorized me as "a nice guy", "gracious", and "accomodating". I'm sure all these things are just delusional, though, because she's not a professing Christian and therefore could never be blessed with insights you lack. ;)
Post a Comment
<< Home