Forum Post: The Seven Biggest Economic Lies
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 13, 2011, 12:20 a.m. EST by jdragonlee
(119)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
THE SEVEN BIGGEST ECONOMIC LIES
The President’s Jobs Bill doesn’t have a chance in Congress — and the Occupiers on Wall Street and elsewhere can’t become a national movement for a more equitable society – unless more Americans know the truth about the economy.
Here’s a short (2 minute 30 second) effort to rebut the seven biggest whoppers now being told by those who want to take America backwards. The major points:
Tax cuts for the rich trickle down to everyone else. Baloney. Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush both sliced taxes on the rich and what happened? Most Americans’ wages (measured by the real median wage) began flattening under Reagan and have dropped since George W. Bush. Trickle-down economics is a cruel joke.
Higher taxes on the rich would hurt the economy and slow job growth. False. From the end of World War II until 1981, the richest Americans faced a top marginal tax rate of 70 percent or above. Under Dwight Eisenhower it was 91 percent. Even after all deductions and credits, the top taxes on the very rich were far higher than they’ve been since. Yet the economy grew faster during those years than it has since. (Don’t believe small businesses would be hurt by a higher marginal tax; fewer than 2 percent of small business owners are in the highest tax bracket.)
Shrinking government generates more jobs. Wrong again. It means fewer government workers – everyone from teachers, fire fighters, police officers, and social workers at the state and local levels to safety inspectors and military personnel at the federal. And fewer government contractors, who would employ fewer private-sector workers. According to Moody’s economist Mark Zandi (a campaign advisor to John McCain), the $61 billion in spending cuts proposed by the House GOP will cost the economy 700,000 jobs this year and next.
Cutting the budget deficit now is more important than boosting the economy. Untrue. With so many Americans out of work, budget cuts now will shrink the economy. They’ll increase unemployment and reduce tax revenues. That will worsen the ratio of the debt to the total economy. The first priority must be getting jobs and growth back by boosting the economy. Only then, when jobs and growth are returning vigorously, should we turn to cutting the deficit.
Medicare and Medicaid are the major drivers of budget deficits. Wrong. Medicare and Medicaid spending is rising quickly, to be sure. But that’s because the nation’s health-care costs are rising so fast. One of the best ways of slowing these costs is to use Medicare and Medicaid’s bargaining power over drug companies and hospitals to reduce costs, and to move from a fee-for-service system to a fee-for-healthy outcomes system. And since Medicare has far lower administrative costs than private health insurers, we should make Medicare available to everyone.
Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. Don’t believe it. Social Security is solvent for the next 26 years. It could be solvent for the next century if we raised the ceiling on income subject to the Social Security payroll tax. That ceiling is now $106,800.
It’s unfair that lower-income Americans don’t pay income tax. Wrong. There’s nothing unfair about it. Lower-income Americans pay out a larger share of their paychecks in payroll taxes, sales taxes, user fees, and tolls than everyone else.
Demagogues through history have known that big lies, repeated often enough, start being believed — unless they’re rebutted. These seven economic whoppers are just plain wrong. Make sure you know the truth – and spread it on.
very good! important factoids! somebody should start making lists of important threads ...like this one..
Read more from Robert Reich: http://robertreich.org/
Very good, bro.
You've got it.
I just copy&paste the article from Robert Reich's website.
beats thinking for yourself
Where's the upvote or like button?
This. Definitely this.
Read more like this: http://robertreich.org/
Very good post. I agree with 90%. I have only one comment about the number 4. Cutting the budget deficit now is important, because this deficit is unsustainable in the long term. But I don't think that the cut should be in social programs or welfare. NO. The cut should be in the MILITARY spending. The USA spends 1 trillion dollars a year with the military. Cut that by half, and you shrink the annual deficit in 500 billion dollars.
You are a moron. How does someone that doesn't have to pay taxes, pay a larger share than someone that pays 20%.
The moron here is you.
Imagine that I earn 2 thousand dollar per month, and I pay 500 dollars per month in payroll taxes, sales taxes, user fees and others. That's 25 percent of my income.
If you are a rich Wall Street yuppie who earns 30 thousand dollars a month, and you pay 20 percent in income tax (6 thousand dollars) plus 900 dollars in payroll taxes, sales taxes, user fees, that's 23 percent of your income (6900 dollars).
25 percent is a larger share than 23 percent.
If you only make 2000 per month, your tax share isn't 500 dollars. Maybe after health insurance, medicare, social security and state and fed taxes. But it is not 500 straight to federal taxes. Go to the IRS site and look at the tax rate table.
Yuppies pays less on the same term, tax or not.
You are an idiot. Take an economics course. While there are obviously some political considerations that make conservative AND liberal economic plans unsuccessful, the major consideration, the one that makes the Conservative argument correct about how the economy grows, is that in the United States we have a surplus of Capital and a scarcity of labor. Therefore, the only way for the economy to achieve real growth is to support the free trade of Capital and trickle down the accried wealth to the working classes to keep them placated.
Right back to ya! This article is written by Robert Reich, a economic professor in UC Berkeley.
Right. Berkeley. No bias there whatsoever.
what makes you think you know better?
I don't. But the established mass of literature on traditional economic theory differs from Mr. Reich's opinion. Just because you 'are' something does not mean you know what you're talking about. For every article like that, there exist 10 that support traditional economic theory and are contradictory.
In fact, the relevant system in academia supports theories that are outside of the norm because they are more likely to be published...