Candid Liberal Kuttner Clamors for Tax and Spend

Photo of Mark Finkelstein.
  • Bookmark and Share


The detritus of Nancy Pelosi's imperial celebrations have barely been cleared, and already at least one member of the liberal punditry, Robert Kuttner, is demanding that the new Dem majority do more of what Dems do best: tax and spend.

It's as if one of the Smithsonian's dinosaurs, taxasaurus democratae, patiently gathering dust all these last dozen years, had suddenly roared to life, broken from its exhibit, and began slouching toward Capitol Hill to be reborn. To mix a metaphor and a poem.

Annotated excerpts from Kuttner's impassioned plea, Get Serious Democrats, from this morning's Boston Globe:

  • "Unless Democrats get serious about repealing Bush's tax cuts for the rich, the result could be further cuts in social outlays for the regular people whom Democrats supposedly champion."

Ah, "the rich" vs. the "regular people." Don't you love the smell of class warfare in the morning?

  • "On the spending side of the ledger, Bush has been hacking away at needed social spending for six years."

Hacking away? You mean, as in domestic spending so out of control that, as reported here, "the Concord Coalition, a bipartisan watchdog, calls this the 'most irresponsible year ever,' and the Heritage Foundation complains "the Republican party is simply not interested in small government now. They're worse than the Democrats they replaced."

  • "Did Democrats win a hard-fought campaign to take back Congress, only to govern like fiscally prudent Republicans -- delivering balanced budgets but with shamefully low levels of social investment?"

If only Kuttner were correct about the Republicans having been tightwads, but isn't it priceless [pun intended] to see a liberal criticize fiscal prudence?

  • "The solution, of course, is to embrace a progressive tax code."

Of course. Soak the rich! They would otherwise just be stuffing their ill-gotten gains into their mattresses or buying a yacht on the backs of the poor. It's not as if they ever invest in the economy and create more jobs, or anything

  • "If Democrats are to be more than Eisenhower Republicans, one good idea is to tie particular tax increases to valued public spending purposes. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has talked up the idea of rolling back tax breaks for the hugely profitable oil industry, and using the proceeds to fund research and development of alternative energy."

Come on, Bob. You're an economist. In theory. You know money is fungible and that this "good idea" is a scam.

  • "Democrats also need to begin undoing the damage of three decades of government-bashing. . . Maybe, once we remember that much of what government does is highly valued, we can have a serious conversation on why government needs to be funded by fair taxes."

Bob, please explain why you're right and Thomas Jefferson -- or was it Thomas Paine -- was wrong when he wrote "that government is best which governs least"?

Contact Mark at mark@gunhill.net

—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

further cuts in social outl

further cuts in social outlays for the regular people

Hmmm, I consider myself a 'regular' person, and I get ZERO outlay from the government. I actually give them money.

shamefully low levels of social investment

So the government is supposed to engage in 'social engineering' at taxpayer expense?

rolling back tax breaks for the hugely profitable oil industry

Why not call it what it really is, a price increase for all Americans on energy costs?

Phooey.

DSG

Liberals cannot help themselves.

Liberals cannot help themselves.

Kuttner and Galbraith, some old same old, not 'economists' they are Liberals.  Galbraith had the decency to pass on...

The Democrats and their squad of cheer leaders may try to show they belong to the mainstream, but they can't help themselves.  The truth will shine out.

They thought 'truth to power' was cute and catchy.  Well, now they are 'power' so here's some truth.

Democrats are out of touch.

ACA

...

Acaiguana says:  "Which city is next?"

Kuttner

Kuttner represents what is now in power because the Republicans blew it. The Rinos have what they deserve. They didn't lead; they abandoned principles. Sadly, it appears to me, they will continue this behavior until all is lost. Just watch them as they lie down with the enemy concerning illegal immigration, taxes, and the war. Sad for America.

NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal

liberal dems

Of course tax-and-spend liberal dems are hopelessly delusional and out of touch with any sound fiscal and monetary policy  Imagine what our lives would be like if we actually had to pay our own way!  Much better to Borrow-and-Spend like the fiscally prudent conservative republicans, that way our grandchildren can pay it back to the Chinese we're borrowing it from, if they can.  The fact our children and grandchildren may have their own plans and needs for the tax revenues they will be paying at that time are totally irrelevant.  This will be one last lesson in money-management our generation can leave them with. Have OUR cake and eat it too, guns AND butter!  Absolutely no reason we responsible conservative republicans should pay our own way when we can pass it along to our offspring.  Keep up the good work George, spend it like ya got it.

Actually it is MUCH better to

Actually it is MUCH better to just hit everyone at 17% of their income with NO exemptions, instead of making the top 40% of wage earners foot 99.94% of the bill for the population; demand a balanced budget amendment to force BOTH parties to shut up and not run deficits to the extent that they have; and stop encouraging our Representatives and Senators to stop bringing home endless pork, and seriously reform "entitlement" spending (privatizing Social Security, anyone?). 

But everyone would rather sit around and cry, and as such they deserve all the crap they can handle.

Oh yeah, your dig and borrowing from China notwithstanding, roughly a third of our debt is held by foreigners, and that is done because it is a safe bet.  I'd imagine Japan has even more debt than does China, just because Japan has more available capital and has a larger economy. 

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???"  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

Shocking

I am shocked!  A Leftist, thinking government is here to coddle and spoil people?  A Leftist thinking he has a claim to that which he has not earned?  A Leftist demanding government punish and steal from the nation's producers? 

Who would have thought?

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???."  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)

we can have a serious convers

we can have a serious conversation on why government needs to be funded by fair taxes."

I think he's on to something here. If we would just pass the Fair Tax, then guys like Kuttner can go out and find a real job, like sorting shoelaces or something.....

Gee Mark, I'm a little disapp

Gee Mark, I'm a little disappointed you can't do a little research to get the right attribute for your quote (Thos Paine, BTW)

Maybe you can also research, why the borrow and spend methodology of the Republican Party is preferable to a pay as you go method.  Is it because future lower earning tax payers can sweat up the money to pay the interest on bonds to foriegn and the high earning, no tax paying Republican constituents?

High earning, no-tax-paying,

High earning, no-tax-paying, huh?

Perhaps you can explain why the top 40% of wage/salary earners pay 99.94% of all federal income taxes then?  (The Economist, 15 April 2006)

Perhaps you can explain why you think that you should be given a green light to steal from the successful and reward/coddle failure via government.

As for me, I like the idea of hitting everyone, regardless of income, at 17% of income, with NO exemptions whatsoever (although I would be quite open to an exemption of, say, $500 or $1000 for each child in the family).  Not only is it simple but everyone pays 17%?  What can be unfair about that?  (Unless of course you just hate people who make a dime more than you do, that is.)

"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???."  - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)