The non-bogus conservative argument against Obamanomics

"Growing inequality and middle-class wage stagnation are big problems for America. But trying to re-regulate the economy and redistribute income is a cure worse than the disease."

So how would Manzi address the big problems? And why isn't it a redistribution of income when the benefits of tax cuts go overwhelmingly to the super rich?

1)a centrist? you write for Time, you're a liberal, get over it and you'll sleep better at night.
2)this quote is criticism? are you joking (see number 1)? Manzi regurgitates every liberals favorite point - the rich are too rich - then goes on to say Obama can't screw up the economy any worse than anyone else. Oh, that's harsh, real harsh.
3)wealth grows exponentially - the more you have the faster it grows, just ask Buffett. That's why stock market graphs are shown on a logarithmic scale. Then again, you know how to redistribute wealth in a 'fair' manner, so I'll shut up.
4)the economy was so strong that it didn't matter if Clinton raised taxes, and he eventually signed NAFTA. Obama wants to kick us twice while we're down, once with taxes and again with less trade. Hoover tried to do both and gave us the Great Depression.

Two problems regarding the first commenter:

Of course, the upper incomes benefit the most from tax reductions as they are paying the great proportion of income tax. The top 10% of wage earners pay about 71% of all income taxes. The bottom 50% of wage earners pay only 3% of all income taxes. Truly astounding.

Next, a huge problem for low wage workers isn't tax policy (they practically don't pay income tax) it is the influx of illegal immigrants stealing their jobs. Every illegal immigrant in the US suppresses wages for the lower working class in the US.

Income distribution is a problem, in that at some point there will be a revolution and the wealthy will be the first up against the wall. It's just not a problem that tax policy is likely to fix.

However, to build on rrsafety's point, if the wealthy end up paying too great a proportion of taxes (whatever that proportion may be), that may end up being a problem too.

I will point out that during the Eisenhower era the top margin rate 90%...result-no revolt by the wealthy. During the Kennedy, the margin rate dropped to 70% but loopholes were closed, creating a net increase of tax receipts...again-no revolution by the wealthy.

More the point, our economy is based on consumption of goods and services. If people have no money to buy goods or services, the economy suffers. In words, income re-distribution would actually help the economy by giving money to those who are very very likely to spend it rather than exporting offshore.

@Corey - my point was that the revolution would be by the less-than-wealthy if the income spread grows too wide. And arguably, on the other side of the coin there was a backlash against the 90% top marginal rates - it was called the Reagan revolution (Reagan was in the 90% bracket as an actor).

Curmudgeon,

Your point about Reagan would have been relevant if it wasn't for the fact that Kennedy reduced the top marginal rate to 70%. No...Reagan was good marketing combined with bad timing for Carter plus potential interference on the part of Reagan with the Hostages in Iran.

However, the logic behind progressive taxation is that the more wealth you possess the more of the commons you use, directly or indirectly. Consequently, you need to pay for that use.

No argument about progressive taxation, merely that there may be a "tipping point." And most of the Regan biographies note that his attitudes toward taxation were formed during the time he was in the 90% bracket.

Corey, you changed the subject.

I stated the proportion of taxes paid by the wealthy and your response was something about what IRS tax brackets were back in the 50's.

Tax brackets mean nothing when you have huge loopholes for the wealth. Nobody was paying 90% back then. Nobody.

Also, the concept that progressive taxes are justified by the wealthy using "more" of the commons is nonsense. We justify progressive taxes because it makes everyone feel better.

@Curmudgeon,

Yeah...there's a tipping point. The Laffer Curve isn't wrong...just misused. I think the optimum point has been estimated at 70%.

@rrsafety,

I wasn't attempting to address your points. However the numbers aren't so astounding when you look at the effective tax rates. If you used the 2004-2005 CBO numbers in your above statement you would have seen that too. Moreover, go read at least the Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax

You may say its nonsense but merely stating something doesn't make it so. You need to provide arguments as to why its nonsense.

Mechanic: You've really screwed your car up here, buddy.
Driver: What seems to be the problem?
Mechanic: We took a couple gaskets and controls out last time you brought'er in here. Turns out that hasn't worked so well.
Driver: What should we do? Put them back? New, better parts?
Mechanic: Honestly, I think re-regulating this car is a cure worse than the disease. Lotta work, I'd have to be smart and careful. I think you should just drive very carefully. And Pray. A lot.

_____________

Am I missing something, or isn't this also a pretty unimpressive critique?

I'd be happy if Manzi actually argued a case using something like logic, but all he offers is a sophomoric and vague rhetoric about how bad things are/might be, coupled with a pompous tone. Nothing new here - just standard conservative pablum.

If there are no problems, no solution is necessary. When it comes to the payday loan industry and the valuable assistance that they provide, there aren't very many problems, if any at all. Many customers have nothing but good things to say, due to the fact that, if used properly, these loans provide a valuable service, and help a person out when they are in trouble. However, many of the people in high places don't see the value behind short-term loans, and want to fix what isn't broken. Some bipartisan fronts have outlawed the industry outright in several states, and even candidate Barack Obama wants to take a shot as well. We aren't going to tell you how to vote, but remember that you have to make the right choice for the people's right to financial independence.

Post Courtesy of Personal Money Store
Professional Blogging Team
Feed Back: 1-866-641-3406
Home: http://personalmoneystore.com/NoFaxPaydayLoans.html
Blog: http://personalmoneystore.com/moneyblog/

If there are no problems, no solution is necessary. When it comes to the payday loan industry and the valuable assistance that they provide, there aren't very many problems, if any at all. Many customers have nothing but good things to say, due to the fact that, if used properly, these loans provide a valuable service, and help a person out when they are in trouble. However, many of the people in high places don't see the value behind short-term loans, and want to fix what isn't broken. Some bipartisan fronts have outlawed the industry outright in several states, and even candidate Barack Obama wants to take a shot as well. We aren't going to tell you how to vote, but remember that you have to make the right choice for the people's right to financial independence.

Post Courtesy of Personal Money Store
Professional Blogging Team
Feed Back: 1-866-641-3406
Home: http://personalmoneystore.com/NoFaxPaydayLoans.html
Blog: http://personalmoneystore.com/moneyblog/

With our economy falling behind, the war on terror, pork barreling legislation, corruption, and criminal activity on the rise, payday loans should be the last thing on politicians' minds. Yet, for some reason, high profile politicians like Obama are focusing on this issue. Some states have banned them, such as Georgia and North Carolina, and more are in the process. Instead of fixing the important issues, they are trying to take out the payday loan industry for personal and political gain. Payday loans are simply for short-term financial assistance for the all-American family to cover some cost that wasn't budgeted or an emergency that they couldn't pay for at that moment. They provide help to citizens during these financially troubling times with loans that the government otherwise couldn't provide themselves. Stop the potential loss of thousands of jobs and the loss of a viable financial option by voicing your opinion to the legislature, before a nationwide ban becomes in effect.
Post Courtesy of Personal Money Store
Payday Loans
Professional Blogging Team
Feed Back: 1-866-641-3406

With our economy falling behind, the war on terror, pork barreling legislation, corruption, and criminal activity on the rise, payday loans should be the last thing on politicians' minds. Yet, for some reason, high profile politicians like Obama are focusing on this issue. Some states have banned them, such as Georgia and North Carolina, and more are in the process. Instead of fixing the important issues, they are trying to take out the payday loan industry for personal and political gain. Payday loans are simply for short-term financial assistance for the all-American family to cover some cost that wasn't budgeted or an emergency that they couldn't pay for at that moment. They provide help to citizens during these financially troubling times with loans that the government otherwise couldn't provide themselves. Stop the potential loss of thousands of jobs and the loss of a viable financial option by voicing your opinion to the legislature, before a nationwide ban becomes in effect.
Post Courtesy of Personal Money Store
Payday Loans
Professional Blogging Team
Feed Back: 1-866-641-3406