Your Call or the Democrats’ Decision?
Written by Brandon on November 6, 2006 – 12:45 pm - Welcome, if you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed or subscribe to our email newsletter. Thanks for visiting!
Are you a student? A professional? A teacher? Someone struggling to make it? Unemployed? A homosexual? Political campaigns love to categorize citizens into these categories and then communicate to each one. Tomorrow’s election here in Wisconsin presents a unique opportunity.
No matter who you are, you can vote your values and still “Make Wisconsin Great Again”. If you are a social liberal, fine, vote what you believe on the Death Penalty and Gay Marriage referendums but, don’t leave the rest of Wisconsin out in the cold by leaving corrupt, ineffective, Jim Doyle in office to stifle our jobs and families with more taxes.
Voting for candidates that support lower taxes and a smaller government (Mark Green, John Gard, Jim Sensenbrenner, look for the (R)) allows you to support anything you want. When they cut taxes, and they will, you get to keep more of your own money allowing you to support any cause you wish, wether it be your child’s education, savings for your future, food for the homeless or homosexual adoption services. With Republicans in office, it’s your call.
When you vote for big tax, big government Democrats like Doyle, Kagen and the rest, you are essentially telling everyone “My pet issues are more important than yours, so I am going to take your money through higher taxes and do with it what I please.” With Democrats in charge, big government makes the call.
Tomorrow, I am voting Yes to equal retribution for heinious murders through the death penalty, Yes to preserve traditional marriage and yes to a brighter future for Wisconsin with Mark Green and my local Republican candidates. I am voting this way not only because it’s what I believe but, because a small Republican government respects all citizens by giving them their money and their state back.
Last 5 posts by Brandon- Wednesday Hero: Chief Warrant Officer 2 Christian P. Humphreys - December 17th, 2008
- Awesome George W Bush Matrix Shoe Dodger Animated Image - December 16th, 2008
- Rep. Paul Ryan Doubles Down With a Second Bailout Failure - December 12th, 2008
- Bailouts Fail Already, More Than Half of Homeowners Back in Default - December 8th, 2008
- Wednesday Hero: Spc. Matthew T. Morris - December 3rd, 2008
Posted in Beyond the Facade, Dismal Doyle, Ministry of Strategery |
November 6th, 2006 at 1:05 pm
Republicans are the party of big-government. Look no further than the last 6 years of Republican control in DC. Republicans choose to spend tax-payer money on abstinence only sex-education, religious charities and no-bid contracts.
I would vote for a candidate that actually wanted to lower taxes and reign-in government spending. Those type of candidates, however, cannot currently be found in the Republican party.
November 6th, 2006 at 1:11 pm
ZC-
George W Bush and the Republicans cut taxes. The economic benefits garned from these tax cuts has actually increased the amount of taxes collected since the cut.
People now have more of their own money, something Mark Green and the Wisconsin Republicans have repeatedly supported. Jim Doyle increased Wisconsin’s tax burden by $600 Million.
Brandon
November 6th, 2006 at 2:35 pm
For Illinois based readers, vote for Judy Baar Topinka for Governor, and Tony Peraica for President of the Cook County Board.
November 6th, 2006 at 3:53 pm
Brandon,
Republicans are not libertarians. In the Reagan years this may have been a tenable position, but not now. Republicans are against letting women choose to have abortions or not. They are also against letting gay couples have the same rights as straight couples. I would make the same argument about these issues that you did in your post. If you don’t want to have an abortion, don’t have one, but don’t legislate your morality. The same thing could be said about gay-partner benefits. If you don’t like gay partner benefits, don’t apply for them. Don’t legislate your morality.
In regard to taxes, no credible economist believes in the Laffer Curve. Even “For example, N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers during the President Bush’s first term, wrote in his popular introductory economics textbook that there is “no credible evidence†that tax cuts pay for themselves, and that an economist who makes such a claim is a “snake oil salesman who is trying to sell a miracle cure.â€
http://www.cbpp.org/7-12-05bud.htm
This article further goes onto describe why there were increased tax revenues in 2005, not because of the tax cuts. For example, there was a large ($50 billion) tax cut for businesses that expired.
I don’t think that you even need to make this intellectually dishonest argument that cutting taxes increases tax revenue. The fact is that there is so much pork and ineffective gov’t programs that cutting taxes, hence cutting tax revenues, would not be a bad thing if we got rid of the pork and bad programs.
November 6th, 2006 at 3:54 pm
Amen, Mr. Sever. Amen.
For the CC Board job, any educated person should be absolutely outraged about how the Dems nominated their candidate.
And people in Wisconsin think they’ve got it bad.
November 6th, 2006 at 4:37 pm
If you want real choice Zach Corey, lower taxes give everyone the ability to choose what to do with their own money. Republicans give you your money back, if you want to use it to support gay rights by lobbying, you are able to. Democrats take that money away from you so you are even less able to represent your beliefs, and spend it in the manner they choose.
The right to spend your money and ultimately your time in the manner you choose supercedes single issues and allows true freedom, whoever you are.
Some Republicans have spent too much, the pork problem is just as bad with Democrats, if not worse, and they want to raise taxes to pay for all their pet projects.
Cutting taxes is the best option, let’s look to the Reagan years:
There is much more if you choose to read it and observe the charts at:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-261.html
November 6th, 2006 at 6:34 pm
Brandon,
Because even in the worst years, the US Economy grows, tax revenue will increase even when the tax rate stays the same. Therefore, it’s important to analyze on the margin. Saying tax revenues increased despite tax cuts (or because of tax cuts) in the 1980s is one thing, saying they increased more than they would have had there been a constant higher tax rate is quite another.
I completely agree that when the highest tax bracket is above 50% it causes substantial detrimental effects to the economy. I also agree that individuals spending their money is better than the government spending it.
To be clear, I think that cutting taxes spurs economic growth. Just not enough economic growth to off-set the loss in tax revenue (which is an acceptable result because government is too big as it is).
On a personal note, I enjoy discussing policy issues as a break from learning about unjust enrichment, intermediate scrutiny, and other esoteric legal concepts. You may also be interested to know that I find myself on the right-center of most political debates here in Ithaca because of my generally market-based policy analysis.
Zach Corey
November 6th, 2006 at 8:15 pm
ZC, you’re right some Republicans have been pro-big government. Usually those were the moderate to liberal Republicans, we call “RINOS”. Bush hasn’t been perfect either vetoeing how many spending bills?
I think Brandon’s point is for tomorrow’s election… there are key races that the choice couldn’t be more clear. IE, the Governors race. Under Jim Doyle, spending increased with a veto pen! The corruption is very high and spending is definitely out of control in every area… that needs to change. I know Mark Green has excellent credentials to be Governor, he just needs your vote tomorrow… then your support and ideas following the election.
November 6th, 2006 at 9:51 pm
“Under Jim Doyle, spending increased with a veto pen!”
At least be intellectually honest. The legislative Republicans cut permissible school spending from an additional $240 per pupil per year to $109 per pupil per year and they did it long after school districts had established their budgets for the coming year, and long after the statutory and contractual deadlines for giving layoff notices to represented employees (who make up roughly 85% of school district budgets). There would have been chaos without the Governor’s partial veto, and every two-bit Republican hack in the legislature knew it. At least be honest. That’s not asking too much of you young Republicans, is it?
November 7th, 2006 at 12:22 am
Actually George, the Republican Legislature increased spending 400 million, the largest increase ever. For Doyle in the Democrats (and WEAC) that wasn’t good enough.
If it were done my way… the WEAC president would be evicted from his mansion in Madison and money would actually go into the classroom– science, HISTORY (foreign to some), math, reading, foreign language, music and art. Not to mention all the money WEAC spent on politics unrelated to education… (stem cell research and planned parenthood related)
November 7th, 2006 at 11:57 am
I almost do not care what the tax rate is…but I think that our Federal government’s 9 million+ word tax code is a crime against democracy.
Tax what you need, tax us once, make it a flat-tax.
November 7th, 2006 at 11:58 am
Think of how much money corporations spend each year just to determine what they owe to the government…it must be in the billions.
November 7th, 2006 at 12:02 pm
Also-
Did anyone see the Wall Street Journal rip Jim Doyle in its lead op-ed today?
It talks about riggin the State Elections Board decision to divest Green of $453,000.