July 18, 2011

Rope-A-Dope Debt-Ceiling Strategy Fails

by Harold Gershowitz

Comments Below

The President’s Rope-A-Dope strategy has failed.  President Obama tried to convince the Republican House Leadership that a fair deal would be to trade a reduction in spending, which given the nation’s burgeoning debt and deficit, should be the country’s first order of business, for increases in taxes, which, given the nation’s current economic malaise, should be the country’s last-resort order of business.  President Obama knows the Speaker genuinely wants to reach a bi-partisan solution to the impending debt-ceiling crisis.  Boehner, however, wasn’t buying the President’s offer to reduce future spending if only he would agree to more increases in taxes.  That’s the “balanced approach” the President is selling and which Boehner, so far, sees through.  It reminds us of the rope-a-dope strategy made famous by Muhammad Ali in the 1974 Rumble in the Jungle with George Foreman.  Foreman was the big loser then and Boehner, had he yielded to White House pressure, would be the big loser now (and so would the country).

We are not anti-tax dogmatists. We simply believe tax policy can only be wisely considered in the context of a strong national pro-growth agenda.  All of the Administration’s most positive projections for reducing the deficit and the national debt have been predicated on Pollyannaish growth projections that are meaningless (and worthless) to everyone in Washington with the apparent sole exception of the President’s speechwriters.

It’s a clever sleight of hand (or, perhaps, we should say sleight of tongue). The President talks about the need to raise revenue (who can argue with that) and demands an increase in tax rates (on higher earners) to achieve that goal, and if no one is paying attention, presto!  He gets to increase taxes.  What is so obviously needed is a substantial increase in economic growth, which would, of course, produce increased tax revenue. Fortunately, it seems Speaker Boehner was paying attention.

The nation’s GDP growth currently is sliding downward, now a paltry 1.8% when we were sold a stimulus program that was to produce nearly twice that rate of growth by now.  Unemployment that was never supposed to reach 8.0% is now at 9.2%.  If ever there was a time to keep more purchasing power in the hands of the people it is now. Half the country gets a complete pass on paying any income tax at all, to which the Administration’s response is to increase taxes on those who are already paying a disproportionate share of the freight.  In fact, millions of tax filers get cash refunds on a portion of the taxes they didn’t pay. This is what the Administration calls a balanced approach to solving the budget crisis.

We are headed, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), to a debt to GDP ratio of over 100% within the decade.  That is, according to best-selling economists, Carmen Reinhart (University of Maryland) and Kenneth Rogoff (Harvard University) patently anti growth.  In just a few months (when Japan is scheduled to lower its corporate tax rate) we will have the highest corporate tax rates in the world.  The Administration has carefully constructed an anti-business National Labor Relations Board, that is pursuing policies that seem determined to rival Putin’s anti-business purges in Russia.  Obamacare is a mess. Over thirteen hundred temporary exemptions have already been accorded to American companies who would have had no choice but to drop employee health coverage or pass significantly higher costs onto their customers.  The CBO has already re-calibrated its ten-year cost projections for Obamacare dramatically upward by over $100 billion (this for the program that the President pledged “would not add one dime to the deficit”).   The federal deficit has surged over 250% from 2008 to the present, and the total interest on our debt (including the interest owed to the people when the government leaves a marker for the funds it takes from so-called dedicated trust funds such as Social Security) is greater than the combined budgets of just about all federal agencies but defense.

With the exception of those Republicans and those few lonely Democrats who understand that the people who sent them to Washington have very serious expectations about reining in federal spending, most of the congressional pontificating is little more than political theater.  It is a chimera designed to pass the proverbial buck to another generation.  The Administration’s Beltwayspeak defines reducing spending as spending at a reduced rate of increase sometime in the future, not cutting back on current expenditures.

The President has shown little inclination to pursue a strong pro-growth agenda, and without strong economic growth we simply cannot substantially alter the bleak outlook about which the CBO has warned.  As we have written in prior essays, the President has, essentially, deep-sixed his own Debt and Deficit Reduction Commission’s recommendations because of its emphasis on growth through reduced tax rates on both individuals and corporations.  Those recommendations were inconsistent with the President’s class warfare election strategy so they were ignored.

Economic data from both liberal and conservative sources show, rather conclusively, that tax rates are not necessarily the key to tax revenue.  In fact, tax revenue has generally remained at between 18% and 20% of GDP regardless of the marginal tax rate levied.  The last two years of World War Two were an exception as tax revenue as a percent of GDP nudged up over 20% and, of course, the current malaise has seen tax revenue dip down as a percent of GDP.  This suggests to us (and many others) that increased economic growth should be our first order of business, not raising tax rates on the wealthy or anyone else. Data from the liberal-leaning Tax Policy Blog (as well as the IRS) show that the top 5.0% of taxpayers (those making over $200,000), on whom the President insists on increasing tax rates, already pay more of the total tax bill than the bottom 80.0% of tax filers.

We continue to hold hostage to unions, long-ago negotiated tax treaties that would significantly improve American exports.  The President wants to increase taxes on capital gains, which simply would reduce taxable transactions and tax revenue from the gains on those deferred transactions.  Frugal Americans who have, over a lifetime, value invested in the stock of American companies in order to build dividend income for their retirement years, face a tripling of the tax rate on their dividends under Obama’s plan to “tax the rich.”  None of this makes sense for a nation that desperately needs to improve economic growth.

Lower tax rates do not guarantee higher tax revenue, just as higher tax rates do not guarantee higher tax revenue.  But lower tax rates are almost always conducive to economic growth and sustained economic growth is essential to maintaining healthy tax revenues.

As stated earlier, we are not anti-tax dogmatists.  We would support the elimination of most special interest federal tax schemes, including the wide array of deductions and credits designed to influence private and corporate citizen behavior if it were accompanied by a reduction in marginal rates, which would spur economic growth, which, in and by itself, should increase tax revenues.    But we have major problems with increasing taxes on anyone without first focusing on policies to stimulate rather than retard economic growth.

Speaker Boehner apparently understands the difference between increases in tax rates and increases in tax revenue.  Democrats in Congress last week have stated loudly and clearly that they will support no meaningful reform of Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. Benefits, they insist, are not to be touched.  Agreeing to increased taxes in return for non-specific promises to reduce future spending would have been a fool’s bargain – a rope-a-dope if ever there was one.

 

All comments regarding these essays, whether they express agreement, disagreement, or an alternate view, are appreciated and welcome. Comments that do not pertain to the subject of the essay or which are ad hominem references to other commenters are not acceptable and will be deleted.

Invite friends, family, and colleagues to receive “Of Thee I Sing 1776” online commentaries. Simply copy, paste, and email them this link—https://lp.constantcontactpages.com/su/ILPzgKS  –and they can begin receiving, free of charge, these weekly essays every Sunday morning.

5 responses to “Rope-A-Dope Debt-Ceiling Strategy Fails”

  1. […] reading here: Rope-A-Dope Debt-Ceiling Strategy Fails – Of Thee I Sing 1776 More Students support Army unit « The Medina County Gazette is a …White, who taught reading […]

  2. mark j levick says:

    Obama knows that his class warfare message trumps your inteligent analysis everytime and that letting the Republicans crater the stock market will insure his re-election and advance his social engineering agenda. The mainstream media continues to play cheerleaeder and any crticisism is deemed racist. In response to Presidental pontifications and generalities the GOP needs to respond — “Where’s the beef?” When forced to provide specifics the campaigner in chief may find himself punched out.

  3. pri says:

    Perhaps half of America doesn’t have to pay taxes but can you guess why? Bush tax cuts gone WILD!! I think it’s a shame that someone earning $60,000 doesn’t pay any taxes but thanks to the tax credit crumbs that Bush threw at the middle class and under, many now pay nothing while those earning millions and more have an extra $400,000 to PLAY with. Get rid of ALL the Bush tax cuts and you’ve solved half the defecit problems. All that money he gave to his rich buddies didn’t do one thing to increase jobs, but it did put us between a rock and a hard place. Now, you want to solve all these years of squandered revenue by taking money out of the pockets of those that can least afford it. Shame on you Republicans! Stop being cry babies and pay up! You and your rich pals are at the lowest tax bracket you’ve been in half a century and the country is paying for it dearly. You’re ideas are insulting. Try living on $40,000 or less pre year and then tell me where you want to make cuts.

    • Interesting, but inaccurate. the Bush tax cuts did not produce the deficit as the commenter suggests. Irresponsible government spending during the Bush years did. The 2003 Bush tax cuts created 8.1 million jobs through 2007. Bush Administration lack of oversight (along with Congress’s deficient oversight with respect to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was, in our often stated view, responsible for the financial melt down and the situation in which we currently find ourselves. Tax revenues increased as a result of the growth spurred by the 2003 tax cuts. The CBO incorrectly calculated that the post-March 2003 tax cuts would lower 2006 revenues by $75 billion. Instead, tax revenues came in $47 billion above the pre-tax cut baseline (Cato Institute analysis). Also, consider that GDP grew at an annual rate of just 1.7% in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts. In the six quarters following the tax cuts the growth rate was 4.1 %. The S&P 500 dropped 18% in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts but increased by 23% over the next six quarters. Finally, the economy lost 267,000 jobs in the six quarters before the 2003 tax cuts, but gained 307,000 jobs in the next six quarters followed by an additional 5 million jobs in the next seven quarters. We believe there are a whole host of special interest tax breaks that distort the market and should be candidates for the chopping block. We concur, however, with the President’s Deficit and Debt Reduction Commission’s recommendations (as well as the bi-partisan gang-of-six recommendations) that reducing individual and corporate tax rates on all tax payers will increase tax revenues by stimulating economic growth.

  4. Mark J Levick says:

    There seems to be a belief among liberal intelligensia that rich people achieved that status by stealing from poor people. There may be some truth in that premise as it applies to the super rich who pay themselves handsomely to the detriment of their shareholders, hedge fund barons who take no risk and still receive captal gains tax treatment on income earned in the ordinary course of their business, bankers who pay nothing to depositors, get free use of FED funds and are bailed out when the manage to “screw up a one car funeral”, celebrity athletes and entertainers who share profits with no risk and the like. Taxing the he’ll out of those folks will make us all feel good and won’t hurt the economy but neither will it make a significant dent in the deficit. Those who work hard and succeed creations, spend money and are taxed to death with state taxes, federal taxes, real estate taxes, municipal taxes, sales taxes, intangibles taxes, corporate taxes, the AMT, 39 year depreciation on real estate assets and more. The fact remains that there are not enough truly rich people to pay the cost of all the Government programs that have been created to help those who cannot help themselves and have succeeded only in creating powerful public employee unions, professional politicians who run for office but don’t govern once elected and a dumbed down society in which everyone is taught that they are entitled to the benefits of America as their birthright. Mandatory public or military service and a course in basic economics would be instructive if it were not so politically incorrect to those who want to use other people’s money to promote their social/political agenda.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *