Tag Archives: Spending

The VAT as a replacement or add-on to the income tax

From the Heritage Foundation. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

Revenue-neutral tax reform involving a VAT substituting for income tax raises a number of concerns, but its one advantage might be that it would reduce or even eliminate the net bias against saving. Such a reform would quickly begin to raise the level of private savings and the private saving rate.

The same cannot be said of adding a VAT to the current tax system. Adding a VAT would not have the same beneficial effects as substituting a VAT because, obviously enough, the anti-savings biases of the current system would remain intact.

Even more telling, a massive VAT-based tax hike would slash the after-tax purchasing power of individuals and families. As they adjusted to the new tax, an early casualty would be private saving.

[…]VAT proponents who seek massive new sources of revenue—whether in the short run to pay for President Obama’s spending surge or to address the nation’s unsustainable long-term fiscal imbalance—sometimes misapply arguments that have some validity in the context of a revenue-neutral tax reform. A good example is the argument that a VAT would increase private saving.

However, as an add-on tax, the VAT would not improve saving incentives as some suggest but would instead hammer private savings for an extended period as individuals and families slash their saving rates to sustain current consumption in light of the VAT’s higher prices.

I am pro-VAT, but only if it is revenue-neutral and is coupled with a cap on federal spending, indexed to inflation. A freeze would be better still!

What’s your view of taxation? Do you like a flat tax or the FAIR tax? Which taxes would you cut and which ones would you raise? What effect would it have on working families and their employers?

Planned Parenthood releases annual report – 324,008 babies aborted

Story from the grass-roots conservative web site Red State. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

Today, abortion giant Planned Parenthood released its 2008-2009 Annual Report.

Behind the colorful graphics and happy faces is a stark number: Planned Parenthood received $363 million in government grants and contracts from 2008 to 2009 alone, all at the expense of the U.S. Taxpayer and the lives of unborn babies.

How many lives are we talking? 324,008 unborn human lives destroyed in one year. How many adoption referrals? 9,433.

Abortion is the law of the land, but we are certainly not obligated to give them federal money to run their business. Certainly we are not obligated to give them a $363 million annual BAILOUT.

Excerpt:

Hmmmn, it looks like the number of abortions is varying by the amount of state subsidies. I wonder how this number will change once abortions are covered by Obamacare and Obamacare is extended to even more uninsured people, and more insured people are forced to buy health care who don’t want coverage for abortion (like pro-life men).

Social conservatives need to understand that fiscal conservatism matters. Evil costs money. Cut off the money, and you cut off the evil.

And any “social conservative” who supports single payer health care is rally a social liberal – anti-life and anti-marriage.

How the federal government and stimulus spending discourage work

A post by Hans Bader at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Excerpt:

Thanks to food stamps, Medicaid, and housing subsidies, and other welfare benefits, many “poor” people have far more disposable income than self-supporting households earning $40,000 to $60,000 a year.  Veronique de Rugy points to a finding that “a one-parent family of three making $14,500 a year (minimum wage) has more disposable income than a family making $60,000 a year” — even excluding benefits from Supplemental Security Income.  “America is now a country which punishes those middle-class people who not only try to work hard, but avoid scamming the system.”

[…]The analysis de Rugy cites actually understates the disincentives to work, because it ignored the fact that many households that are “poor” in terms of taxable income are not poor at all once you factor in tax-free income from non-governmental sources.  For example, child support is tax-free to the recipient family, no matter how huge the payments they receive (for example, a billionaire may pay several million dollars a year in child support to each of his ex-girlfriends with kids, leaving them in tax-free luxury, and under New York’s child support guidelines, everyone is supposed to pay at least 17 percent of their gross income in child support for just one child, regardless of how high that income is.  In Massachusetts, middle-income households pay 25 percent of gross income for just one kid — which is around a third of their after-tax income — under that state’s child support guidelines).

He also talks about how the federal government encourages child support agencies to yank more children away from their parents – they get more funding that way!