Who Wants to Raise Taxes? Bueller…? Bueller….?
Ben Stein may be known best by my generation knows as the best as the economics teacher in the movie Ferris Bueller’s Day Off (”Bueller…. Bueller….?). But he is also an attorney, former presidential speechwriter (for Nixon and Ford) and regular newspaper columnist for the New York Times.
Stein’s political beliefs generally tilt towards the right, pictured above at the 2000 Republican National Convention. He is notoriously anti-evolution, pro-life and fiscally conservative.
That’s why this article from Sunday’s New York Times (though published on the web on Saturday, free registration required) fascinated me. Stein came out in swinging against McCain’s economic and tax platform.
Stein begins by quoting McCain as saying that he won’t raise taxes. That, Stein says, more or less, sounds nice. And then he inserts the big BUT:
But the unhappy fact is that it’s necessary to raise my taxes and the taxes of all upper-income Americans. (I do wish, however, that “upper income” started just a dollar above me.)
The sad truth of the last two two-term Republican presidents is that their economic premise, the key part of their economic game plan, simply has not done what it’s supposed to do.
That is, cutting taxes, especially on upper-income Americans, does not generate so much economic activity that it replaces all the lost I.R.S. take and then some. At least those have been the results so far.
He goes on to cite a brief history of conservative economic policy, attempting to debunk the notion that cutting taxes for the wealth spurs economic growth. He is notes that with Bush, like Reagan, government spending has increased while revenues from taxes have fallen. Despite the fact that Stein believes that military spending was necessary (really, Ben?), he adds another BUT:
But we have been left with immense deficits and a doubled national debt as President Bush enters his final months in office.
McCain, he argues, isn’t thinking correctly. Spending, Stein notes, is going to continue to rise if our levels of spending remain the same (which they likely will). The solution, he believes, is to not raise taxes on the poor or middle class, nor to not cut taxes on the wealthy. He believes McCain’s plan, which includes tax cuts for the wealthy is in fact, flawed:
I don’t like taxing rich people or anyone I like. But our government — run by the people we elected — needs the revenue. Do we pay it or do we make our children pay it? Dwight D. Eisenhower — and Bill Clinton — knew the answer: You behave responsibly and balance the budget except in rare circumstances.
He ends his piece by reminding us that he is a Republican - and that personal and national responsibility are important. Gasp, it’s enough to make him sound like… a traditional Republican? The irony of his statements is that fiscal conservatism used to be a basic tenet of the Republican party; Stein, in my opinion, is wagging his finger at the party to remind them of what they used to be.
This theory, of course, is nothing new. Separately, Stein has repeated the observation made by Warren Buffett, one of the richest individuals in the world that Buffet pays a lower overall tax rate than his secretaries. (For a similar article about Warren Buffet, click here.)
I thought Stein’s piece was remarkably thoughtful and rant-free. Give it a peek and let me know: What do you think? Is he right?
Technorati Tags:
economy, tax, tax policy, John McCain, Ben Stein, George Bush, Warren Buffet
LOL Food for thought…
