government spending stimulus consumption sustainable

Shifting taxes and subsidies would make the economy serve us
economic growth tax cuts

Practical Reasons Why Stimulus Spending Doesn't Work

Both Right and Left critique each other accurately. In this 2009 op-ed from the Hawaii Reporter of Jan 12, the writer critiques big spending for a stimulus or bailout. But his proposal is misguided. What’s really needed is to lose the mentality that we need to serve the economy instead of vice versa. That makes the vision of geonomics -- replacing taxes and subsidies with the recovery and sharing of Earth’s worth -- compelling. The writer is a policy analyst at Reason Foundation.

by Anthony Randazzo

Contrary to popular belief, the government spending programs implemented during the Hoover, Roosevelt, Ford, and George W. Bush administrations did not create sustained economic growth or reduce unemployment long-term. Neither did Japan's years of stimulus spending in the 1990s bring Japan's economy out of recession. Stimulus packages are never fully successful.

Barack Obama and Congress are beginning to debate a two-year, $775 billion proposal that includes up to 40 percent in tax cuts. However, there are very practical reasons why this don't work the way they are projected.

To try to stimulate economic growth, I prefer ax cuts. Allowing companies to keep more of their revenue is an incentive to create more wealth and thus promote economic growth. Allowing individuals to spend more of their own money as they see fit helps the market more accurately understand demand signals then when the government just spends trying create demand out of nothing.

Stephanie Cutter, a spokeswoman for President-elect Obama, said that the incoming administration was trying to create private-sector jobs through a package that has a big and immediate impact. "We're guided by what works," she said, "not by any ideology or special interests." If that's the case, they should look beyond stimulus spending and cutting taxes.

JJS: And look to geonomics. The key is not so much cutting taxes as shifting them. Wherever tried, to the degree tried, it has worked. In the 1970s recession in Australia, the towns that levied the usual property tax, on both buildings and land, of course lost business. The towns that levied only land and spared buildings did not lose less business, did not break even, but actually gained new business. This tax on land spurs owners to develop while the zero tax on improvements rewards owners for developing. Even in a recession, while others suffer, geonomics works. Let’s use it.

---------------------

Jeffery J. Smith runs the Forum on Geonomics.

Also see:

Tax Cuts and Budget Deficits
http://www.progress.org/2003/fold298.htm

(On Democrats, Tax, and Common Sense)
http://www.progress.org/archive/mcc04.htm

We don’t need a stimulus but a paradigm shift
http://www.progress.org/2008/stimulus.htm

Email this articleSign up for free Progress Report updates via email


What are your views? Share your opinions with The Progress Report:

Your name

Your email address

Your nation (or your state, if you're in the USA)

Check this box if you'd like to receive occasional Economic Justice announcements via email. No more than one every three weeks on average.


Page One Page Two Archive
Discussion Room Letters What's Geoism?

Henry Search Engine