Revisiting Better Times When Economic Prosperity Was Working
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
Over the just concluded weekend I’ve been spending some time with Arthur Laffer’s and Stephen Moore’s book, “Return to Prosperity”. Laffer is widely renown as the economist who provided the Laffer Curve, demonstrating that lowering taxes actually results in increased government revenue and that as you force taxes higher the impact is a reduction in the receipts government acquires.
While I understand that in the class warfare approach of the majority party, ruling in Washington, D.C. and also in charge of the Nevada Legislature, the theme of choice to discredit those who support “supply-side” economics is that “rich” people benefit and “poor” people don’t. That idea and vilification is one of the reasons I’ve been enjoying the book as much as I have. Laffer has the advantage of 25 years of economic boom-times with the detailed numbers that show how well everybody did when growing the economy was the emphasis.
Contrasting those times against our current socialistic wealth redistribution and government-centric approaches and you see clearly that when enhancing the private sector brought about 25 years of prosperity and how the current policies are only prolonging and escalating the downturn into a full-blown depression. While Senator Reid and his fellow champions of government try to convince us that they are buying us better times (using our wallets to accomplish their promise) – the economy continues to falter and fail. Record high unemployment, failing business enterprises and an overall desperate private sector is somehow supposed to represent something we should be grateful for having.
Meanwhile the results produced when supply-side economics were practiced are besmirched and maligned as times of immoral greed. Low unemployment for all, economic advancement for all (especially the lower tiers of the income scale) and federal government surpluses just don’t match up with the outstanding greatness we’re “enjoying” now?
It would be great if American voters would take the time to review the information contained in “Return to Prosperity” and come to understand the concepts of how our system works best when private sector growth is allowed to deliver benefits. If such understanding would be possible the themes of getting elected to represent us would take on a whole new set of messages…we wouldn’t be called on to contact the offices of those who are destroying our economy to “thank” them for all they’ve been doing. We also wouldn’t be told to believe that someone is too wacky for their principles of reduction of government.
For those who aren’t inclined to take my word for the assessment I’m offering – please make the point of picking up a copy of “Return to Prosperity” and we will have something to discuss.
Over the just concluded weekend I’ve been spending some time with Arthur Laffer’s and Stephen Moore’s book, “Return to Prosperity”. Laffer is widely renown as the economist who provided the Laffer Curve, demonstrating that lowering taxes actually results in increased government revenue and that as you force taxes higher the impact is a reduction in the receipts government acquires.
While I understand that in the class warfare approach of the majority party, ruling in Washington, D.C. and also in charge of the Nevada Legislature, the theme of choice to discredit those who support “supply-side” economics is that “rich” people benefit and “poor” people don’t. That idea and vilification is one of the reasons I’ve been enjoying the book as much as I have. Laffer has the advantage of 25 years of economic boom-times with the detailed numbers that show how well everybody did when growing the economy was the emphasis.
Contrasting those times against our current socialistic wealth redistribution and government-centric approaches and you see clearly that when enhancing the private sector brought about 25 years of prosperity and how the current policies are only prolonging and escalating the downturn into a full-blown depression. While Senator Reid and his fellow champions of government try to convince us that they are buying us better times (using our wallets to accomplish their promise) – the economy continues to falter and fail. Record high unemployment, failing business enterprises and an overall desperate private sector is somehow supposed to represent something we should be grateful for having.
Meanwhile the results produced when supply-side economics were practiced are besmirched and maligned as times of immoral greed. Low unemployment for all, economic advancement for all (especially the lower tiers of the income scale) and federal government surpluses just don’t match up with the outstanding greatness we’re “enjoying” now?
It would be great if American voters would take the time to review the information contained in “Return to Prosperity” and come to understand the concepts of how our system works best when private sector growth is allowed to deliver benefits. If such understanding would be possible the themes of getting elected to represent us would take on a whole new set of messages…we wouldn’t be called on to contact the offices of those who are destroying our economy to “thank” them for all they’ve been doing. We also wouldn’t be told to believe that someone is too wacky for their principles of reduction of government.
For those who aren’t inclined to take my word for the assessment I’m offering – please make the point of picking up a copy of “Return to Prosperity” and we will have something to discuss.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 6/28/2010 8:23 AM 
Categories: Economy
Tags: Unemployment Nevada Budget State Spending Taxes Government
Categories: Economy
Tags: Unemployment Nevada Budget State Spending Taxes Government
Doug,
Once again you're well of the mark. Laffer is aptly named. The "prosperity" you're undoubtedly referring to is the Regan Administration's supply side economics. They achieved the numbers Laffer sites by cooking the books. Too many people unemployed and on welfare? No problem, we'll simply say that after a year on welfare, they'll no longer be counted in the statistics. See? Supply side economics works!
The Republicans can't escape the fact that, during the Bush Administration, they had the White House and a congressional majority. They were elected to govern. Govern MEANS regulate. Instead, the Republicans allowed American jobs to be shipped overseas, cheap Chinese goods to flood the market, allowed banks to give credit in an unrestricted fashion, and allowed investment banks to repeatedly parcel mountains of insoluble debt into securities, while the very banks who issued the securities were placing credit default swaps (bets) against their own programs. In short, a massive Ponzi scheme. The whole world participated, and when the "housing bubble" collapsed, it took down most of the world's economies.
Obama inherited an horrific mess. He followed remedies pioneered by the Roosevelt administration, and they have stabilized our economy to a degree. GM is back on its feet, and the U.S. Government is no longer in the automobile business. Without recovering our manufacturing base, though, the stabilization won't last. So, instead of screaming "socialism," why don't you put pressure on Heller and Ensign to force the complete prohibition of credit default swaps, and adjure them to suggest a means to recover our manufacturing base from China? Otherwise, the Party of No will continue to rightfully bear the blame for bringing down the American economy.
Reply to this
Dang straight. I mean, just look at this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsB_rnzBA08&feature=channel
Such bad bad times. No seriously, what the heck? Reagan brought in unprecedented revenues as his policy LIFTED people into higher tax brackets, and we're supposed to look back on those times with scorn? We're supposed to go back to foolish Keynesian economics? Ugh.
No, what we need is a repeat of Reagan, new and improved with an even simpler tax structure, and actual SPENDING discipline to go alongside the revenue boost!
Reply to this
Here are some videos on the Laffer curve from the Cato Institute's Dan Mitchell that you might find informative!
Part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/user/afq2007#p/u/41/fIqyCpCPrvU
2 - http://www.youtube.com/user/afq2007#p/u/40/YsB_rnzBA08
3- http://www.youtube.com/user/afq2007#p/u/37/Mw7LtVwDCbs
Reply to this