As the policy debate has unfolded in Washington this year, voters have consistently believed that tax cuts would do more than increased government spending to stimulate the economy and create jobs. Now that the nation's unemployment rate has reached 10.2%, voters continue to hold that view.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 62% believe tax cuts are a better way to create jobs and fight unemployment. Only 21% believe that additional stimulus spending is a more effective tool. Earlier this year, as the first stimulus package was being debated in Congress, 62% of voters wanted the plan to have more tax cuts and less spending.
Given a different choice today, 51% believe canceling the rest of the stimulus money would create more jobs while 32% say spending the money would be the better approach to job creation. These findings are consistent with earlier polling. Most Americans say that, generally speaking, increased government spending is bad for the economy. Earlier this year, before the unemployment rate had reached its current highs, 45% wanted to cancel the rest of the stimulus spending while just 36% disagreed.
While voters believe that tax cuts and stopping spending is the path to job creation, the Political Class disagrees. Sixty-nine percent (69%) of those in the Political Class say that spending the stimulus money would create more jobs than canceling the remaining stimulus spending. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the Political Class believes that new spending will create more jobs than tax cuts. Only 13% believe the tax cutting would do more.
The problem with what Rasmussen so aptly calls the 'Political Class' is that they don't live in the same reality the rest of us do. This whole debate about health care 'reform' is a perfect example - they will exempt themselves from whatever fatally sucky system they force on the rest of us. I would guess it's no different for any other policy, so when they talk about raising tax rates to gouge the 'rich' -- and remember, that very likely includes you, you middle class person you! -- it doesn't affect them, or at least not much. They don't have to worry about living paycheck to paycheck because most of their expenses are already paid for by tax dollars (you and me), and most of them are fantastically wealthy anyway.
It's one thing to have increased taxes take a bigger bite out of a $1 million-a-year income - yeah, it sucks, but you're not exactly going to starve with several hundred thousand dollars left over. But, a bigger bite out of a salary like you and I get -- let's say the median household income, which is around $50,000 -- and you're talking a serious crunch. Most families can't absorb another 5-10% loss of pay without cutting some really substantial things, possibly even genuine necessities, but increased taxation does exactly that by taking money out of that family's pocket.
This is why there is such a disconnect between the Political Class and the rest of us. I think it would be tremendously beneficial to put the SERVICE back into public service by enacting a law that sets the annual salary of Congress equal to the previous year's median household income in the U.S. That would help get rid of some of the gold-diggers that are already in Washington, and I think it would incent Congress to do everything possible to increase the standard of living for all of us, which would benefit them in turn.
And that would mean cutting taxes and spending less, something the non-Political Class have already figured out. Looks like Congress has a lot to learn from the average American citizen.
There's my two cents.
No comments:
Post a Comment