Currently US based multinationals use clever legal accounting to transfer profit to other countries with lower tax rates. Therefore other countries get the tax revenue that was actually produced in our country. Closing the current "loopholes" and increasing corporate tax will only drive them out entirely. What we really need to do is lower the corporate tax and close the loopholes. The effective rate would not be significantly lower, but the incentive to transfer profit abroad would largely be removed and would thus increase the revenue received by the US treasury.
I won't spend a lot of time on Obama's plan to increase the capital gains tax because I think most people generally know that it will likely actually reduce tax receipts from capital gains and hurt the US stock market. History tells us that when capital gains are increased, revenues decrease, and when capital gains rates are decreased, revenues increase. It is nearly as easy to invest in foreign stock markets as it is to invest in the US. If I can pay lower capital gains taxes on foreign investments you can bet that I will be investing there.
Finally, Obama plans to increase the minimum wage. On the surface it seems like a decent idea. After all, I wanted that single-mom working full-time trying to support her children, the one that Obama talks about during his minimum wage discussions, to be able to earn a living wage. The problem is that only about 6% of minimum wage earners over the age of 24 are single parents. Most are between the ages of 16 and 24. The average household income for people earning minimum wage or less is more than $50,000. (Stats from Bureau of Labor Statistics) Though it would make high schoolers happy, an increase in minimum wage raises the expenses for businesses employing people who make minimum wage, which will then increase the costs of goods and services provided, which will then disproportionately harm those who shop mostly at business that hire minimum wage employees. The least impacted will be wealthy individuals who shop at higher end stores and pay for higher end services that will not be as significantly impacted by the change.
In each case it is the poor who will ultimately be hurt the most. Those who are wealthy enough to rely on investments for income will be fine because they can simply invest overseas as our economy falters and taxes on US investments rises. Corporations can simply move overseas and import their goods to the US. Finally, the wages of the cashier at Whole Foods, the salesman at Coach, and barista at Starbucks will not change because they are already well above minimum wage and thus our yuppie friends will coast through largely unscathed. Meanwhile, that single mom who buys her groceries at Wal-Mart, her clothes at K-Mart, and treats her three kids to a Pizza Hut party on Saturday will wonder how she is making $2 an hour more but is even further behind her bills at the end of the month.
If Obama is elected there is some hope that things will not be as bad as I have described. Perhaps he will be prudent enough to listen to a free market economist for advice like Clinton did, though I have seen little indication that he would ask a Republican for advice on anything. The one positive is that he does not seem terribly principled on many of his positions and so may be willing to sacrifice his economic principles in favor of pragmatism. His stance on the war inches daily closer to the position McCain has been defending for the past several years. Judging from his record and his rhetoric, he may be willing to be compromise if there is at least some pressure from Congress to do so. The only principle on which he has never waivered is denying basic human rights to the unborn or recently born. So as long he doesn't decide that a sound economic plan could somehow indirectly lead to granting those little ones rights, perhaps there is some hope...for the economy anyway.
8 comments:
I was doing some reading the other day and realized how ill informed most people are. Like many people, I thought that raising taxes on people who have over a millions dollars would just be effecting the elites, but then I found out that about 3/4 of these people are actually small business owners who keep their companies funds in private accounts in order to prevent their businesses from being taxed to death. So what seems like a strike for the proletariat is actually a crippling attack against them.
This is exactly why the economic strategy you think up with your friends from you Intro to Political Science class at the local coffee shop should never become a government policy. Luckily most politicians grow out of those ideas once they get some experience under their belt, except for Obama with his perpetual college sophomore worldview.
And here, I thought raising minimum wage would be a good thing. Thanks for the statistics; they help me to comprehend the bottom line behind these policies. You have a way of explaining things plainly so that even an economic moron like me can understand.
Hey J,
Great summary! Could you do me a favor and respond to some of the more common defenses of Obama's plan, particularly the idea that he's giving a tax break to 95% of all Americans?
That last post was by "Mr. Beth," by the way, not "Mrs. Beth."
Jason (Carter, not Mr. Beth),
I recognize that your blog is not a call-in show, but I wondered if you would be willing to blog on the worth (or lack thereof) of voting third-party. I saw this topic on a lesser blog and would love to know what you think. Here's the sources the other blogger used:
http://www.freedomkeys.com/whatfor.htm#quotes
http://satyagraha.wordpress.com/2008/01/07/why-vote-third-party/
Thanks from a long time listener, first time caller. ;)
In short, Obama's plan would directly lower taxes for about 95% of Americans when compared to tax rates if recent tax cuts were allowed to expire. Obama will not directly raise taxes on anyone that makes under $250k. You might remember that he said that he would eliminate the cap on SS tax, which would effectively raise taxes on everyone that makes over $102k. He later said he would add a donut hole that would exempt income between $102k and $250k from social security tax.
To make up for the lack of tax revenue from those "middle class" making from 100k-250k he plans to increase taxes on corporations and "wealthy individuals" (most of whom are actually small business owners). He would increase the corporate tax rate to 40% and close "loopholes" as I mentioned in the post. Obama doesn't have much nice to say about big business, but interestingly does seem to believe that these corporations will simply pay more in taxes and not pass the cost on to consumers. Hmm. I do not share his view. So Americans will get a tax cut, as long as they can avoid buying groceries, cars, electricity and anything else that corporations help produce.
He would also raise tax the top individual income tax rate to about 40%. So for an example someone living in New York City will pay a top tax rate of over 67%. (12.4% SS, 2.9% Medicare, 39.6% FICA, 8% state, 4.12% city) That is not to say they pay 67% of everything they make. The tax rate increases at various breakpoints of income. 67% is the rate they will pay on their top dollar earned, which means that for the top earners they will pay that rate on most of their income. I am generally in favor of some kind of progressive tax system, but maybe we should let people keep at least half of what they earn. I don't know about you but I would have to think seriously about either not starting a small business at all or starting in another country if I knew that I would be working to pay more money to people making $150k.
What I would be really interested to see is a simulation of what the quality of life for a person (or family) living entirely off the government would be under the Obama plan. My guess is that you could be quite comfortable which is really a problem if you ask me.
Maybe I'm a bit callous but it seems to me that life should be difficult and uncomfortable on the bottom. I don't like to see people suffering, but I do think that things like really good health care and other benefits should be reserved for those who work or those who are seriously disabled (like CP not "I'm fat and my back hurts lifting things.").
From what I can tell, Obama is taking the stick out of the stick and carrot system. So we are now telling people that they are entitled to a carrot and they can work to get more carrots if they want but if they work too hard then we take away more carrots. In fact, I take that back, the stick is still there, we are just using it on successful people those bad bad successful people. Shame on them for thinking they are entitled to what they worked hard to obtain.
Post a Comment