Quote:
Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum
Taxes pay for the investments that create economic growth. The internet, mobile telephony, the basic research that's responsible for nearly every small molecule therapeutic, the interstate highway system; trains. The purchase of the center of the continent from the French. All of that required taxes and spending by a commonwealth.
Some investments can only be made by a group of people. People need to pool their money to make those investments. If that money is wasted, it's wasteful and inefficient. If that money creates the internet, the returns can be astronomical.
|
What you are talking about is whether or not Government spending needs to happen, but that's not what I'm arguing with you about. Everybody knows that Government spending is needed.
What I'm talking about is whether high taxes lead to a thriving economy, and you just aren't making that case. You brought up high tax states having large economies, but all you are revealing here is a correlation.
Where is the
causation?
I would argue that in most cases, thriving and bustling economies came first, and higher taxes came second. Over time, high commerce places brought in a lot of corruption, abuse, waste, entrenched interests, "bottom feeder" type people like Mike Madigan, Ed Burke and their minions who decided to use the system to enrich themselves. And the only way to have kept the tap flowing decade after decade is to slowly raise taxes and fees. Even if a lot of money goes into infrastructure, you ultimately have to raise taxes to maintain those splashy, ribbon-cutting projects built by your grandparents which won them votes.
So I'm not saying that high taxes are all bad. I'm just saying that I suspect they come
after a thriving economy, as opposed to being the
cause of it.
Prev
Could not agree more.
Linear Mode
