Rush Limbaugh proposed a great comprise in leading the country out of this recession: Keynesian AND Supply Side economics – divvied up by voter split (54/46 for Obama in this case) This is quite brilliant politically. Rush is calling for President Obama to put his money where his mouth is – both figuratively with all his talk of bi-partisanship and literally with his economic idealogy.
And this second part is the kicker. If Obama and the Left are sooo convinced that their grow government tatics are the only way out of this recession – why not once and for all prove it. Side by side with the republican’s tax cut methods – real life economic turn around data could be gathered. Both sides CLAIM their method works, but never in history have both be tried in such a side by side manner.
How many jobs does a $100B tax cut create vs how many jobs does a $100B infrastructure program create? Done simultaneously, you remove most of the external factors (since they would the same for both) that make such historical comparisons so difficult. So again, if you are sure your stuff works – why not prove it? Put up or shut up.
There’s a serious debate in this country as to how best to end the recession. The average recession will last five to 11 months; the average recovery will last six years. Recessions will end on their own if they’re left alone. What can make the recession worse is the wrong kind of government intervention….
Keynesian economists believe government spending on “shovel-ready” infrastructure projects — schools, roads, bridges — is the best way to stimulate our staggering economy. Supply-side economists make an equally persuasive case that tax cuts are the surest and quickest way to create permanent jobs and cause an economy to rebound. That happened under JFK, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. We know that when tax rates are cut in a recession, it brings an economy back.
Recent polling indicates that the American people are in favor of both approaches…
Congress is currently haggling over how to spend $900 billion generated by American taxpayers in the private sector. (It’s important to remember that it’s the people’s money, not Washington’s.) In a Jan. 23 meeting between President Obama and Republican leaders, Rep. Eric Cantor (R., Va.) proposed a moderate tax cut plan. President Obama responded, “I won. I’m going to trump you on that.”
Yes, elections have consequences. But where’s the bipartisanship, Mr. Obama? This does not have to be a divisive issue. My proposal is a genuine compromise.
Fifty-three percent of American voters voted for Barack Obama; 46% voted for John McCain, and 1% voted for wackos. Give that 1% to President Obama. Let’s say the vote was 54% to 46%. As a way to bring the country together and at the same time determine the most effective way to deal with recessions, under the Obama-Limbaugh Stimulus Plan of 2009: 54% of the $900 billion — $486 billion — will be spent on infrastructure and pork as defined by Mr. Obama and the Democrats; 46% — $414 billion — will be directed toward tax cuts, as determined by me…
Then we compare. We see which stimulus actually works. This is bipartisanship! It would satisfy the American people’s wishes, as polls currently note; and it would also serve as a measurable test as to which approach best stimulates job growth.
I say, cut the U.S. corporate tax rate — at 35%, among the highest of all industrialized nations — in half. Suspend the capital gains tax for a year to incentivize new investment, after which it would be reimposed at 10%. Then get out of the way! …