July 7, 2005
THE LIBERAL CASE FOR TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY:
Do Tax Cuts for the Wealthy Stimulate Employment? (ROBERT H. FRANK, 7/07/05, NY Times)
Had the dollars required to finance the president's tax cuts been used in other ways, they would have made a real difference. Larger tax cuts for middle- and low-income families, for example, would have stimulated immediate new spending because the savings rates for most of these families are low. And their additional spending would have been largely for products made by domestic businesses - which would have led, in turn, to increased employment.Grants to cash-starved state and local governments would have prevented layoffs of thousands of teachers and police officers. And many useful jobs could have been created directly. For instance, people could have been hired to scrutinize the cargo containers that currently enter the nation's ports uninspected.
The argument that without tax cuts for the wealthy the public employee workforce would have been greatly expanded is just another point in the President's favor. Posted by Orrin Judd at July 7, 2005 6:20 AM
Government employees, especially puiblic school teachers, have made themselves political client of the Democrat party. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
Posted by: Lou Gots at July 7, 2005 10:51 AMLarger tax cuts for middle- and low-income families, for example...
Low-income families don't pay any Federal income taxes. Most of them pay negative income taxes, due to the EIC.
Middle-class families, by definition, include children, and the child credit was doubled to $ 1,000 each, an additional $ 1,500 annual tax break for families with three kids.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at July 7, 2005 9:55 PM