| Subject: "Dynamic Scoring and Prescription Drug Plan" or "The Power To Tax Is The Power To Destroy" |
Author:
Kris
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 10:07:35 07/18/03 Fri
Listen up readers. This is going to blow your minds. Even Jung can get caught up in one-sided political rhetoric. I'll only address 2 points from Jung's flawed analysis, though. Afterwards, I encourage all you liberal-types to respond (I know you're out there).
1. On the subject of the most recent tax cut: There are always at least 2 ways to look at things. Tax rates are no exception. These particular 2 ways are Static and Dynamic Scoring. Since I'm on a limited schedule here, I'll quote from the Heritage Foundation and GOPAC websites to explain the two ideas.
STATIC SCORING: "Congress for too long has regularly debated tax policy changes without seriously considering how those changes might affect the economy. Absent an understanding of how tax and fiscal policies influence economic behavior, the static "cost" estimates produced by the official revenue estimators (the staffs of the JCT, CBO, and the Treasury Department's Office of Tax Analysis) often are shockingly wrong and nearly always misleading. The Joint Committee's routine analysis of tax bills, for instance, implies that tax policies have no effect on the general economy, never produce a feedback of higher or lower revenues, and never cause resources to shift from one use to another.
As a result, the current static approach creates an artificial and incorrect bias in favor of tax rate increases and against pro-growth tax rate reductions. Without a change in this policy, that bias will persist and meaningful tax reform will be nearly impossible to accomplish." http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features/agenda_reality.cfm
DYNAMIC SCORING: Dynamic analysis -- sometimes referred to as reality-based scoring -- is based on the commonsense assumption that taxes do affect the economy. Dynamic scoring recognizes, for instance, that higher tax rates discourage work, saving, and investment. Because of these negative "feedback effects," tax rate increases will generate less revenue than predicted by static estimates. Conversely, because lower tax rates increase economic growth and result in more jobs, higher wages, and bigger profits, dynamic scoring will show that certain tax cuts will be at least partially self-financing. This more accurate methodology should be used instead of static scoring.
http://www.gopac.org/gopac/resource/
Now, quickly apply what you've learned about dynamic scoring to H.R. 1 (the Medicare Prescription Drug and Modernization Act of 2003) and you'll find that things aren't nearly as bleak as you've been led to believe.
To paraphrase my old boss: "this opens up the Medicare prescription drug market to competition, which (using that good old conservative economic sense) inherently raises the quality of the product and lowers cost. Don't believe me naysayers? Read some Adam Smith, and you'll see his principles used in the most economically sound nations on Earth including The U S of A. Hell, read some Marx and Engles if you want to, and then ask yourself if any of their suggested policies created better economies. No.
Readers, if you want socialized medicine like Sweeden, if you want to write the government a blank check for your health care in the form of incredibly high taxes, you can have it. But remember, a blank check is always made out for everything you've got. Once an entity controls your money, they control you. Suddenly, your blank check has been written out for your freedom.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 