Tax and Spend Republicans

[Andonyx]

I'm sorry I'm really sick of the damn myth that Democrats are eggregiosously fiscally irresponsible, and that all they do is tax and spend, that's such a joke. Here in Illinois we have a Democratic City Mayor and a Democratic Governor both of whom are trying to find ways to cap property taxes, although a sales tax increase may be the stop-gap measure. During the Clinton Administration the Government increases and overal discretionary income spending rose at a snail's pace compared to either the Reagan era, or either Bush era. Likewise a Republican was responsible for the largest single income tax increase ever...so whence comes this myth....

Confounding President Bush's pledges to rein in government growth, federal discretionary spending expanded by 12.5 percent in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, capping a two-year bulge that saw the government grow by more than 27 percent, according to preliminary spending figures from congressional budget panels.

The sudden rise in spending subject to Congress's annual discretion stands in marked contrast to the 1990s, when such discretionary spending rose an average of 2.4 percent a year. Not since 1980 and 1981 has federal spending risen at a similar clip. Before those two years, spending increases of this magnitude occurred at the height of the Vietnam War, 1966 to 1968.

...

But the Republican-led Congress has not obliged. The federal government spent nearly &dol;826 billion in fiscal 2003, an increase of &dol;91.5 billion over 2002, said G. William Hoagland, a senior budget and economic aide to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.). Military spending shot up nearly 17 percent, to &dol;407.3 billion, but nonmilitary discretionary spending also far outpaced Bush's limit, rising 8.7 percent, to &dol;418.6 billion.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A28252-2003Nov11?language=printer

Now granted there's a freaking war going on so a chunk of this is expected but I still haven't seen anything since Carter to make me believe there is a pattern of overtaxing and overspending on the part of Democrats.

 

[Tony]

I'm sorry I'm really sick of the damn myth that Democrats are eggregiosously fiscally irresponsible, and that all they do is tax and spend, that's such a joke. Here in Illinois we have a Democratic City Mayor and a Democratic Governor both of whom are trying to find ways to cap property taxes, although a sales tax increase may be the stop-gap measure. During the Clinton Administration the Government increases and overal discretionary income spending rose at a snail's pace compared to either the Reagan era, or either Bush era. Likewise a Republican was responsible for the largest single income tax increase ever...so whence comes this myth....



http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A28252-2003Nov11?language=printer

Now granted there's a freaking war going on so a chunk of this is expected but I still haven't seen anything since Carter to make me believe there is a pattern of overtaxing and overspending on the part of Democrats. [/B]

There are many political myths in the US (the democrats being the civil rights party is one of them), this is one of them. How would you go about educating the general public so that these myths would die? It seems that it is unlikely to happen as long as partisan politics dominate.

 

[Andonyx]

Re: Re: Tax and Spend Republicans

There are many political myths in the US (the democrats being the civil rights party is one of them), this is one of them. How would you go about educating the general public so that these myths would die? It seems that it is unlikely to happen as long as partisan politics dominate.

This is a fair question....I guess the key is finding out how they start.

It would be easy to take the idea that it's viscious spin doctoring by the opposite party, but I think that's too simplistic a solution. For one reason or another people are comitted to believing certain things about either party. The thing is at one time or another all these things are true about either party.

My High School government teacher actualy put it best when he said, "The party's aims are almost always the same. No candidate no matter what party he is in is going to say, "I love crime, let the poor starve, and education is for jerks." It' boils down to how they want to go about getting to their aims.

While I think that's true in part. I think the main issue that polls and opinion counting are the driving forces in politics. When you have a presidential administration campaigning for their second term from the first day of their first term, I guess a lot of platform ideals and campaign promises get thrown by the way-side.

 

[The Don]

Left wingers - tax and spend

Right wingers - borrow and spend

The spending always carries on apace. It's just what the spending is carried out on, the rhetoric applied to the issue of spending and the method or raising money which is different.

BTW, by these standards, the current UK government is right wing - something with which I cannot realistically disagree

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Left wingers - tax and spend

Right wingers - borrow and spend

The spending always carries on apace. It's just what the spending is carried out on, the rhetoric applied to the issue of spending and the method or raising money which is different.

BTW, by these standards, the current UK government is right wing - something with which I cannot realistically disagree

Surely by these standards the current UK government is both left AND right wing as they have raised both taxes and borrowing to fund spending?

 

[The Don]

I agree, although past right wing governments have also raised taxes so it was a bit of a gross simplification


http://www.taxfreedomday.co.uk/short-history.htm

 

[pgwenthold]

Left wingers - tax and spend

Right wingers - borrow and spend

The spending always carries on apace. It's just what the spending is carried out on, the rhetoric applied to the issue of spending and the method or raising money which is different.

The real question in the end is who actually increases the spending. Reagan did. Clinton kept it mostly in check.

It's not out of the realm of reality to suggest that the republicans are the ones who are the big "spenders." Granted, the dems aren't doing a big job of cutting back the spending that the republicans put in.

However, could it be that the republicans increase the spending, while the democrats maintain the spending but actually apply the taxes to pay for it?

 

[shanek]

Either way, it's clear that neither of them are really for smaller government; so if you want smaller government, and think you're going to get it voting for Republicans, you're just fooling yourself. The Republicans are NOT going to work to reduce the size of government any time soon.

 

[The Don]

Trouble is, there's little consensus in the about what to cut spending on. A majority seem to want more spending on:

- Healthcare
- Education
- Police
- Emergency services
- Transportation
- Social security (especially pensions)

And there is a desire to "reduce waste and inefficiency" (if only it were that easy). Of course everybody has their hobby horses about what could be easily cut.

I'm happy for people to have smaller government (say no/limited unemployment benefits) so long as they're prepeared to live with the consequences and don't start whining as soon as they require the benefit or service they jsut abolished.

 

[pgwenthold]

Trouble is, there's little consensus in the about what to cut spending on. A majority seem to want more spending on:

- Healthcare
- Education
- Police
- Emergency services
- Transportation
- Social security (especially pensions)

And there is a desire to "reduce waste and inefficiency" (if only it were that easy). Of course everybody has their hobby horses about what could be easily cut.

I agree completely. All the spending is there, and once the spending starts, no one is really all that keen on cutting it. The problem is that the democrats actually try to pay for the services by taxing, whereas the republicans just borrow the money.

Of course, there is the bigger question of increasing spending. My postulate above is that the republicans are the ones who increase spending more, but pay for it by borrowing. The democrats don't really raise spending all that much, but increase taxes to cover the cost of the republican-baloon, instead of borrowing. Thus, dems are viewed as the bad guys, despite the fact that they are only trying to pay for the things that the republicans put in on credit. Neither group ever does anything to cut the overall budget, as any budget cuts in one area are immediately given to another.