Tax-and-spend demagogues prey on ignorance
I have two sets of friends. The first are old friends, artists, bohemians of
some sort -- usually, given my great age, successful ones. I love them dearly,
but openly treat them as if they were slightly -- how do I put this politely? -
- well, OK ... retarded. As if they are missing a critical element, rendering
them somewhat child-like.
With warm hearts, and often stunning perceptual abilities, they know what I
think: that there is a great chunk of the world that they simply do not get.
"How come I don't know that?" is a question I hear more often than not, in the
great loud flow of occasional argument.
The answer is, almost always: "because you haven't studied economics." These
friends of mine are empaths, wanting everyone to do well, and be happy. As a
result, they are prey to the demagoguery of the left.
The second set of friends has studied economics. They know that the demand
curve is the most important graph invented by man. And if you don't understand
price elasticity, the multiplier effect, and the fact that individuals will
always, always maximize their materialistic fulfillment -- as they define it -
- you'll think it's possible to bully people into wanting things they don't
want, like Canadian movies, the infantilization of reserve aboriginals and the
gun registry.
What you get after decades of forcing people to pay for all this is
desperation. This explains why, for instance, realtors in Victoria make
television ads saying things like: "Americans don't believe our prices, they're
like kids in a candy store! If you want to sell your house, this is the time!"
By holding back our economy for decades, the provincial NDP and labour unions
have ensured that (a) our house prices are low; (b) people are desperate for
money; and (c) much of the best real estate on the West Coast will soon be
owned by Americans.
The greatest liberal fearmongering is sold under the rubric, "tax cuts for the
rich," or just "tax cuts." But all over the world, and especially to the south
of us, tax cuts have been shown to have long- term, stimulative effects on the
economy. Thanks to Bush's tax cuts, the Americans are single-handedly hauling
the rest of the world out of the doldrums into another boom. Their economy is
growing at roughly 4.5%, ours at 2.2%, the tax-and-regulation-heavy European
states at 1%. But the declinists, seeing U.S. success, cry foul. Tax cuts cut
social programs! They cause deficits!
Sorry, but there is such a thing as history. And during the eight years of the
Reagan administration, federal government revenue jumped from US$599-billion in
1981 to US$909-billion in 1988.
Gee whiz, how is this possible? Could it be that giving people's money back to
them makes the economy grow faster than when bureaucrats create useless
programs? And that a growing economy sends more money to the government than
one throttled by big government?
I feel like I'm reinventing the wheel here. But somehow, this very obvious fact
simply isn't being taught. Deficits increased during the Reagan term, this is
true -- but receipts rose by nearly the same amount, proportionally speaking.
And let's remind ourselves that the free-spending Democrats held both houses of
Congress.
Tax cuts do not have to mean that social services are cut. More often, they
mean that social service programs can continue to exist. Usually however, a
government brave enough to cut taxes, will insist that social programs become
efficient, so free-riders are shoved off the gravy train, and then complain
loudly. The economics-deficient members of the press misreport these cases with
glee.
In the last decade, there has been no greater illustration of the benefit of
tax cuts than the cases of Ireland and Japan. Japan's government, once a feared
competitor, took the Keynesian route, meddling in everything and causing the
economy to stagnate. Ireland, on the other hand, slashed its tax rate. As a
result, unemployment plummeted; and for the first time in its history, the
country began to lure back significant numbers of expatriates. During the
1990s, after many years of low growth, Ireland grew from 6% to 10% a year.
We could do that. For decades, our freedom has been curtailed by champagne
socialists who've convinced us that we need them to spend all our money or
we'll turn into Americans. Well we don't, and we won't. Let's make them go
away. For a long long time.