creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Linda Chavez
Linda Chavez
25 May 2012
Overreach by Unions in Wisconsin

The Wisconsin recall election of Republican Gov. Scott Walker is not going quite like the unions and the … Read More.

18 May 2012
Family Mysteries

Like many Americans, genealogy has been a keen interest of mine. I've had a good sense of where my family … Read More.

11 May 2012
Loose Lips Endanger Lives

The U.S. dodged another terrorist bullet when a would-be "underwear bomber" turned out to be a … Read More.

Same Old Same Old

Share Comment

The president was in full campaign mode this week as he delivered a stump speech on the economy in Cleveland. But the magic is gone. He's no longer the silver-tongued orator who could make us feel good about ourselves and the prospects for our country — which was key to his victory in 2008. Now he's just another partisan hack blaming the other party for his own failure of leadership.

Instead of changing his tone and rhetoric, the president should be focused on changing his policies. But he seems incapable of any new thinking on what to do about the ailing economy. His only solution is to spend more. He's now touting a new economic stimulus: $50 billion in supposed infrastructure spending, which he's coupled to some targeted tax breaks for businesses. But few people — including those vulnerable members of Congress in his own party — are buying his plan, for good reason.

If nearly a trillion dollars in stimulus spending couldn't create enough jobs to drop the unemployment rate to under 9 percent, how could adding $50 billion more for infrastructure improvements make a difference? The problem with the president's new plan is the same as it was with the old one. Government doesn't "create" jobs. Government only grows at the expense of taxpayers, siphoning off money that could be put to better use in the private sector.

Nor is the president's plan to give a few targeted tax breaks to business any more likely to create permanent jobs. The president's plan is just another attempt to micromanage the economy. Instead of enacting an across-the-board tax cut — or simply keeping in place the Bush tax cuts that are due to expire — he is proposing specific tax breaks that he hopes will motivate certain kinds of business behavior.

The top corporate tax rate in the U.S. is 39 percent, one of the highest in the industrialized world. Instead of lowering the top rate to that of, say, Germany's or the United Kingdom's, both of which are below 30 percent, the president is proposing to allow businesses to write off certain expenses.

He'd like to make permanent a tax credit for research and development, and he'd allow businesses to write off 100 percent of their capital investments in 2011 instead of writing them down over several years.

But businesses don't make decisions about expanding their workforce on the basis of one-year write-offs. If the president had even an iota of business experience, maybe he'd understand that. One-year tax breaks may improve the short-term bottom line for corporations, but successful businesses operate on a longer time horizon. Do the president and his advisers really believe that a company that receives a one-year $5 million write-off will go out and hire 100 new employees as a result? Not likely, especially since the cost of employing those workers will continue to rise long after the tax benefits have disappeared.

A tax rate cut, however, can motivate hiring. If a company knows that its tax bill is going down permanently, it may well be motivated to spend that money in hiring more people or in making capital improvements (which creates jobs for workers employed by other companies). But no responsible CEO would make such a decision on the basis of a one-time credit or write-off.

But cutting taxes is only half the solution. Tax cuts that produce real economic growth lead to higher revenues. But cutting government spending is by far the most important thing we can do to improve the economy. And those cuts need to come at the state and local as well as the federal level. Cadillac pensions and benefits for public employees are bankrupting states like California. And entitlement spending at the federal level must be brought under control — as painful as it will be to do so. But few politicians in either party want to tackle Social Security or Medicare reform — Reps. Paul Ryan, Mike Pence and a handful of others in the GOP are the exceptions.

We cannot tax and spend our way out of the current economic mess. American voters understand that. Now it's time for the politicians, especially the president, to get the message.

Linda Chavez is the author of "An Unlikely Conservative: The Transformation of an Ex-Liberal." To find out more about Linda Chavez, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM


Comments

2 Comments | Post Comment
Linda Chavez's article: “same old same old” was amusing, but simultaneously embarrassing for her self-exposed ignorance and her pretense of knowing how CEO's think or act. I tried www.creators.com looking for any experience or education that could justify her self-deception; there was none posted.
Ms. Chavez should read Froma Harrop's September 9 article: "The rich are not here to give us jobs." Harrop's article, as an antidote to the Boehner Kool-Aid Chavez has been drinking, would improve her knowledge.
Comment: #1
Posted by: John N
Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:28 AM
Linda Chavez is a political columnist. That means her job is to know a little of everything, especially in response to current events. She also has extensive experience in conservative think tanks. That means she does know a little of everything. And she has written several books. That means she has the intellectual rigor to look up the answers to questions she does not immediately know. By your standards, no one on this site should write a thing about today's most imporant issues. Well, that's not happening.
In this article, Linda Chavez drew from one of her strongest areas of strongest expertise and study (labor unions), cited facts and figures to back up her weaker points, and had one point substantiated only by a very good argument.
If you'd read Linda Chavez for any length of time you'd know she follows a very different and personal tune from Congress. It is time for you to overcome your own self-deception.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Jorge
Mon Sep 13, 2010 4:56 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Linda Chavez
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

12 Jun 2009 Power Grab

13 Apr 2012 Feminists Limit Women's Choices

27 Jun 2008 Right To Bear Arms