Truth and Taxes

As I pointed out in yesterday's post, it would behoove us to remember from time to time, that the American experiment only works if it works for everyone, that we are only as good as our weakest link, that the future of America rests on the shoulders of all Americans. It is important to keep in mind that when everyone benefits, I do as well, you do as well, we do as well.

The conversation about taxation is perhaps the crux of the deteriorating political discourse in America. A discourse in which we are given talking points rather than facts or ideas, and a political discourse that too often forces Americans to think in terms of what is best for me vs. what is best for all of us. To this point, the Republican party has been remarkably successful packaging and selling a flawed product to the American public. It is a selfish, me-first argument that is cloaked under the guise of economic growth.

The Republican story about taxes is simple: lower them and the economy grows and we all benefit. This isn't untrue. In fact, if you unwrap all the ideology around this basic narrative, it makes a lot of sense and incorporated into it are quite a few good ideas. But it has become perverted. The Republican anti-tax crusade, spurred ever-forward by Grover Norquist - an American truly dedicated to the decline of our country - is now nothing but a sham. Problematically it is an appealing sham because it reflects a natural "me-first" tendency. We all want more money! I would love to have more money! I even mention it to my boss from time to time. And when Republicans tell us that if we all just keep a little more money for ourselves rather than giving it to Uncle Sam then we will be better off and the economic pie will grow, they are selling us our greed wrapped in a faux altruism.

So what is the truth about taxes? And how does the truth play into a national conversation about taxes? The truth about taxes is that there is no hard data, no real numbers to prove that further lowering taxes will contribute to economic growth. If tax rates were absurdly high as they have been in the past, then maybe, but we've already passed the tipping point there. Warren Buffet and Bill Gates have so much money left over that they give vast sums to charity, and in Buffet's case beg the government to take more of it from him and other super rich Americans. Tax rates of 70% or higher as they have been in the past are stifling for growth. Tax rates of 35% are not. Ronald Reagan is hailed as a conservative hero in part for presiding over a period of growth. Reagan raised  taxes. Bill Clinton is hated by conservatives because he presided over a period of growth. Clinton raised taxes. I'm not trying to say that raising taxes is a recipe for growing the economy, but supply-sided economics has no data to back it up, and besides, supply vs. demand is not like chicken vs. egg. Perhaps we can endlessly debate which came first, the chicken or the egg, but there is no supply without demand. Giving "job creators" more and more money in the form of tax cuts with which to produce more goods and services does not lead to more goods and services if there is no demand for those goods and services. Demand precedes supply.

On November 6th, Americans rejected the notion that lowering taxes even further for the wealthy - and paying for it by cutting services for everyone else - would increase economic growth. We were wise to make this decision. The truth will set you free or some cliche like that. But if we know that taxes for the wealthy are already low enough so that further cuts won't contribute significantly to growth, why are we still having this conversation? Well if we know the truth about taxes, we also know how the Republican party handles the truth. They ignore it, or when they can, suppress it. And that is what we are seeing now in the national conversation about taxes. Just a few weeks ago, Republicans strong-armed the Congressional Research Service - a nonpartisan branch of the Library of Congress - into withdrawing an economic report that found no correlation between economic growth and lower taxes for the wealthiest Americans. Imagine that. A report citing what most people already understand was removed because Republicans disagreed with its "findings and wording."

So we know the truth about taxes, and we know how Republicans handle the truth, and this should scare us. I despise Mitt Romney not because I think all his ideas are bad, but because he was willing to lie blatantly time and time and time and time again to realize his ambition. His campaign would not be dictated by fact-checkers. Most people thought Mitt Romney won the first presidential debate, but every major news outlet pointed out that he lied multiple times throughout that debate. Not what-ifs, not speculations, not even half-truths. The man simply lied. And now we see that this isn't specific to Mitt Romney though in fairness we knew that before. When Republicans see facts and data that contradicts their beliefs, they suppress it. A nation built on free speech finds itself in the awkward position of having one of its major political parties suppressing reports that disprove its ideology. This is dangerous for our nation's future.

We already know that Republicans are in denial of science as it pertains to evolution and climate change, now we see firm evidence that they are in denial of the truth when it comes to their economic agenda as well. It was just two years ago that Congressional Republicans were ignoring an inconvenient report by the Congressional Budget Office that repealing Obamacare would actually cost more than implementing the law. And now we get this.

Getting taxing and spending right is important to America's immediate and long-term future, but nothing is more important to the survival of our country than the truth. If our electorate is uninformed and inundated with lies then we will make decisions that exacerbate rather than ease our problems. America cannot survive without the truth, and one party has made the decision that its ideology - flawed and disproven though it may be - has trumped cold hard facts.